Okay, once and for all. The Qur'an is NOT the equivalent of the Bible

[jobycom]

The Bible is a book, inspired by God according to some religions, but still a book, written by man, interpreted, translated, altered, and voted on by man. It is a message from God.

The Qur'an is the actual word of God. It is only read in Arabic--all translations, even into Modern Standard Arabic, are considered interpretations. The actual Qur'an is not a book, it is not the pages that the words are written on, and it is not the ink that forms the words. It is the direct word of Allah, Recited (Qur'an mean Recitation) directly into Muhammad's ear. It is the final message from God. It is also an eternal message that has existed within God forever.

Flushing the Qur'an is not flushing a book, a Bible, a symbol, a text, or a reprint--it is flushing the literal, actual, eternal word of God. It is flushing God into a place most Muslims consider vile and unclean, in a way even more dramatically than Americans do.

If there are any real liberals who haven't understood that, who don't grasp what is happening here, please try a little harder. This is not a minor offense. This is a direct assault on Allah and all Muslim belief. It is a capital crime in some nations, similar to treason. Those who think we can retaliate by flushing Bibles to piss off the fundies DO NOT UNDERSTAND the difference. There is nothing in the fundie world of equal importance to this. Perhaps, if you passed a law forbidding any Christian from praying, and executed any Christian caught praying anywhere, you would start to come close to what was done at Guantanamo.

I'm not saying all Muslims would react this way. Just that a large enough number will to make this the beginning of a pan-Islamic revolt, if we keep it up. Perhaps that is what the White House and the Pentagon finally understood, in their reaction to the Newsweek story. The British didn't think their tea tax was that big a deal, either.

[Walt Starr]

1. You don't know many fundies, do you?

The Bible is the literal word of God. Ask the folks who go to your local mega-church and they'll tell you the same thing.

[cestpaspossible]

2. Yeah, I'm missing the distinction here

personally, I think they are both books written by people, but that is not what the believers think...

[w13rd0]

9. The distinction is this...

...most Christians would not run into a burning building to save a copy of the Bible. Unless we are talking priceless family heirloom. But a "priceless family heirloom" is exactly how many in the Islamic world view a Koran written, not interpreted into another language, but written/transcribed. The discussion could get fairly theologically heavy...

[cestpaspossible]

23. Maybe it's just something

that's hard for an atheist like me understand.

[jobycom]

70. I'm an atheist, I get it

Just takes a little work, that's all

[Eloriel]

97. Well, I think the distinction -- which I appreciate you bringing to DU,

btw -- is spiritual, and I would maintain that "even atheists" can grok "spiritual," whether they want to admit it or not. :evilgrin:

[cestpaspossible]

110. OK

I guess you're just more willing to do 'hard work' then me...

:eyes:

[erichzann]

95. That's not the point the OP makes.

He is not describing how the Q'ran and the Bible are similar. He is saying that unlike what Christains believe about the Bible. Muslims believe the Q'ran is the literal word of God.

However, the OP is apparently unfamiliar with mainstream western chrisitanity, which does indeed belive the bible to be God's word.

[tblue37]

104. Try this--

Take a very religious traditionalist Catholic and have him watch you piss and shit on a consecrated wafer or into a chalice of consecrated wine. Oh, and Muslims react far more strongly to the "uncleanliness" of excrement than non-Muslims do.

[erichzann]

109. That may be true - the "uncleanliness" part.

[knitter4democracy]

297. That's a good example.

For Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and other Christians who believe that Communion is the Body and Blood of our Lord, that would be the equivalent.

I'll never forget seeing how our priest reacted when some accidentally fell on the floor--we have to burn anything it touches other than the cup, the spoon, and our mouths. It's a Holy thing, and it has to be treated as such. The idea of flushing it down the toilet makes me ill.

[jobycom]

108. The OP--me--is VERY familiar with mainstream western Christianity

And as I've said a few times, if you think there is no distinction, you haven't read the post closely enough.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jobycom]

176. I am very familiar with the terms and concepts (final LONG post)

having grown up fundamentalist, and as I've said so often I'm tired of typing, having a lot of friends and family members who are fundamentalist Christians.

It's still very different from the way a Muslim sees the Qur'an. And I'm not talking about an undercurrent, but about the basic doctrine on which the religion is founded.

Christians read the Bible in their native language, not in the languages it was originally written in. They will cite the Bible in English to prove their point. They will take a quote out of context, almost like an I Ching, to prove a point. They will misquote it.

A Muslim would not consider a translation of the Qur'an to be the actual Qur'an. They would not consider a Qur'an in the original Arabic to be a copy of the Qur'an, but the real thing. In Gitmo, the prisoners are given surgical masks by our government in which to store their Qur'ans, to prevent them from being polluted by the infidel. A Qur'an falling on the floor is a traumatic event. It is not a book. No matter what a Christian believes about the Bible, no matter how much they worship it (and I've argued that many times, that they worship the book and not the god), it is still a COPY of the Bible.

I'm not arguing that some Christians don't treat the Bible with great reverence. I know people who get upset if someone reads the Bible without dressing in their finest clothes. I know people who have tried to learn Hebrew and Aramaic and Greek to better understand the Bible as it literally was written. I know people who think I'm lying when I tell them Jesus didn't speak English.

It is not the same thing. The Qur'an is not a book in which you learn about Allah or Allah's will. It is not a book you read, so much as it is a sacred relic, a piece of Allah himself. Yes, Muslims try to understand it and its message, and some even cite it the way fundamentalists cite the Bible. And it is the source of Islamic belief and law. But it is more than that, in a way that there is no parallel in Christianity.

It is not just the content that is flawless and perfect. It is the grammar, the word structure, the beauty of the words as they are written. Islamic art is based on the formation of the letters of the Qur'an-- look at a mosque, or a government buiding. All that scrolling decoration is Qur'anic verse. It is the basis of what poetry should sound like. Many Muslims memorize the entire Qur'an in ancient Arabic, even though they cannot understand it.

It is not a book. It is the source of all knowledge, all law, all doctrine. It IS the word of God, in the original language that God spoke. The Bible is nothing like it.

I've never met a fundamentalist who would kill himself because his Bible fell on the floor. A fundamentalist who lost his Bible would buy a new one. When you say that fundamentalist Christians worship the Bible (and I agree with that), you are saying they worship the words, the message, etc. It is not a relic. Some Bibles may become relics through age or whatever. Fundamentalists generally treat each Bible with a great deal of reverence. But it is a very different thing than the Qur'an.

I'm done. If you still don't see the difference, then I just don't write well enough to explain it.

[erichzann]

178. Summary: the effect is exactly the same.

Oh and by the way, if you haven't met a fundamentalist who would kill himself because his bible fell on the floor, perhaps you should become better aquainted with the history of Christianity.

I agree with you that some christians fit your description when it comes to the bible. But some don't. How do I know this? Becuase one is standing right next to me as I am typing this.

By the way, not all muslims treat the Q'ran the way you describe. One of the things I don't like about your writing is your absolutist language.

[erichzann]

255. Ok - I admit it, on thinking on it more I've been more persuaded by you

I think there are still some small points where I'd want to contend with what you're saying, but I've been thinking about it for the last hour, and you're starting to win me over a little bit.

See, it can happen. :)

[Generic Other]

265. Thanks for explaining the distinction, Joby!

The reaction to the desecration of the Qur'an then is comparable to the reaction of fundies when the Ten Commandments are removed from the front of courthouses, only a 1000 times stronger. And to non-believers looks equally irrational.

Either way, not worth shedding blood over in my opinion.

Thanks for a thought provoking post.

[w13rd0]

185. Nonsense...

...biblical innerrency, even given the most fundamentalist of definitions, requires that one be versed in the "original biblical languages" (Aramaic, Greek, Hebrew). A translation is still a translation, and the VAST majority of Christians do NOT read the Bible, let alone read it in its original languages.

[erichzann]

188. You miss the point.

You are attempting to apply REASON to a belief that is IRRATIONAL.

PLENTY of funadmenatlist christians I personally know belief that the english King James Bible is Biblcally inerrent. And no ammount of your (and my) logic will convince them otherwise.

Nonesense or not, that is still what some people believe.

[cally]

232. I think you are missing the point

This is not the belief that the Bible or the Koran is inerrant. Christians believe the Bible is the word of God written down and translated by man. Muslims believe the Koran is a part of God. The book itself is holy.

I have a very difficult time understanding this because it is so foreign to my Christian beliefs. I do know their is a fundamental difference.

[DoNotRefill]

138. Yeah, and I believe that toenail clippings actually contain our souls...

that don't make it so...

[erichzann]

186. Yeah thanks - no one is arguing that

Newsflash: this isn't a thread debating whether religious claims are true or not. Is is a thread debating what religious people actually believe, not the merit of those beliefs.

[DoNotRefill]

284. So if I believe that toenail clippings contain people's souls...

I have a right to scream for the killing of people who desecrate toenail clippings?

[blondeatlast]

127. I'm just curious where the idea that a Muslim would run into a burning

building to save a Q'ran came from?

My SIL is a very devoted Muslim, and I'm pretty sure she'd let it burn.

I'll ask her next time I see her.

[theboss]

128. I don't think most Muslims would do that either

The ones protesting may...but most believers of any faith can believe that the words are sacred without believing that the object is sacred.

However, flushing either down that toilet is an act of desecration by the intent.

Example. If I were carrying my Bible and dropped it in a mud puddle, I would probably throw it away and buy a new one. But if someone lit a Bible on fire in front of me and started saying vulgar things about Jesus Christ, I would be infuriated.

[phylny]

219. Interesting. I wouldn't be infuriated.

That person's disrespect has no bearing upon my faith or my beliefs.

Indeed, in the USA, other people have every right to throw a Bible in the mud and say vulgar things about Jesus Christ. It's rude, it's not nice, but it wouldn't affect me or my faith one bit.

[jobycom]

7. I grew up in Mississippi and live in Texas. I know a LOT of fundies

And was basically a fundie myself as a child. If you don't get the distinction, try harder, and then harder again, until you do. Because, and I know you can't really accept this, you are just wrong. I'm not saying that as an opinion or an attack, I am saying it the same way I would tell you you were wrong for saying 2+2=6.

[Walt Starr]

24. Nope, still no distinction

None whatsoever.

:shrug:

[jobycom]

74. I wouldn't admit that.

Our president is proud of his ignorance, but it is unbefitting of Democrats.

[Walt Starr]

89. You confuse "ignorance" with "opinion"

You have your "opinion" on this and I have mine.

The treatments of allegedly divine texts are no different from Islam to Christianity in my opinion.

Calling me ignorant after rationally weighing the evidence and formulating my opinion is not very endearing. In fact, it's a borderline personal attack.

[jobycom]

111. Geeze, so now it's down to "I know you are but what am I" huh?

It's not opinion, it's a matter of doctrine. You're trying very hard without using any facts and by only shouting the same thing in a number of different ways, to not get this. I understand. I've seen kids treat algebra the same way.

It's not a question of opinion. Your opinion can be that the world is flat, and no matter how cute your rhetoric gets, it will still be wrong. Not just an opinion. But wrong. You are arguing something you have no clue about.

[Walt Starr]

121. No, it's a matter of *opinion*

I say fundie idiots revering their holy writs are just as batshit loony regardless of religion.

you disagree.

[jobycom]

182. That actually was never my argument, nor my point

I wasn't talking about what I believed, only the difference between a Bible and Qur'an to the believers. As I've said often, i don't believe either one. I wouldn't insult people's beliefs (not on an international bulletin board, anyway) by calling them "batshit loony," but that's just me.

Hell, I'm so skeptical I think most scientists are fundamentalists, too, just for a different religion.

[DoNotRefill]

143. You say it's a matter of doctrine and not opinion...

but what is doctrine if NOT opinion?

So, a bunch of people believe weird crap. There are still people out there that think the earth is flat. That doesn't make it so.

[jobycom]

183. I'm sure I'll get no argument from you by pointing out

that one day science will disprove a lot of things we believe are true, too. Hell, we may even move beyond both science and revelation one day into some new epistimology we can't even grasp yet.

So, we believe a bunch of weird crap, too. We just don't know it's weird crap. That doesn't make it not so.

[DoNotRefill]

273. People have a right to believe anything they want to....

right up to the point that they try to force their beliefs on others.

[Swamp Rat]

113. This is unecessary

Walt Starr is NOT ignorant, and neither are you nor I.

[jobycom]

119. Ignorance means lack of knowledge about something

I am ignorant on the workings of a nuclear fusion reactor, for instance. I'm sure I can find something you are ignorant of, as well.

But for you, SR, I will apologize. If you think I went too far. I wasn't aiming at Walt, just his knowledge on the subject, but if you read it that way, then I'm sure I was wrong. Sorry, Walt.

[Swamp Rat]

134. YES!!! Be excellent to each other!

I experienced a vicious attack from another DUer this weekend and I'm worried about the divisiveness I've seen lately. Of course, I'm not in any way implying YOU are being divisive, it's just that I am sensitive to it right now... open wound so to speak.

And, you are right about ignorance. I, for one, am ignorant about the visceral experiences of Muslims concerning their beliefs and bible.

[tx_dem41]

147. And, the OP was attempting to shed some light on that subject....

for us ignorant DUers.

Hey, Swamprat! I've been off the forum for a few weeks. Great to talk to you. Where are the graphics??? (Or are we on DU DefCon1?)

[Swamp Rat]

173. Actually,

:hi:

I was at DefCon100 these past two days because I came under viscious attack by another DUer. Karma is taking a bite as we speak. :)

I just finished exams, term papers, etc. but I have rehearsals and gigs to play. In fact, I gotta go very soon.

I hope you are enjoying life, for we don't know how long we have!

[jobycom]

177. Eh, Walt and I have survived other debates, we'll survive this one

My memory is too bad to hold grudges.

[Swamp Rat]

270. LOL!

[Karenina]

199. Jobycom is revealing

his sensitivity, education and empathy in his description of a viewpoint and point of reference is different. True communication begins when one realizes it is not about what was "said," it's about how it was "heard" by the listener. One has to care deeply to make that distinction and work with it.

[tblue37]

107. Walt, I posted this above, but I want to make sure you see it:

Take a very religious traditionalist Catholic and have him watch you piss and shit on a consecrated wafer or into a chalice of consecrated wine. Oh, and Muslims react far more strongly to the "uncleanliness" of excrement than non-Muslims do.

[DoNotRefill]

145. I'm game...

find me a traditionalist catholic, and I'm all for it.

[knitter4democracy]

298. How about an Eastern Orthodox Christian?

The idea of doing that to our Lord's Body and Blood makes me ill and helps me understand why everyone's reacting the way they are about how the Koran is being treated.

[tx_dem41]

32. FWIW, I understand the distinction you're making.

Maybe it takes a fellow Texan with Mississippi roots to get it. :)

[jobycom]

69. I've been assuming people misunderstood Islam, but now I realize

they misunderstand Christian fundamentalism, as well.

So you have Mississippi roots, too? Where from?

[tx_dem41]

73. My mother is from Greenville (and Greenwood before that).

Cousins in Starkville, Aberdeen, Columbus. I was actually born and raised in Louisiana (S'port and New Orleans). I'm in Dallas now.

[jobycom]

77. I was born in Louisiana, too. Baton Rouge.

Grew up on the Coast in Mississippi, moved to Dallas when I was 20, then fled to Austin.

I went to college in Starkville, had a favorite preacher (when I was a believer) who moved to Greenville, or Greenwood--I forget which one, now.

So we're sort of cosmic neighbors, then. :-)

[tx_dem41]

78. Sounds like it...

Other than the fact you're a Mississippi State Bulldog!

Geaux Tigers! ;)

[jobycom]

84. Bulldog, Longhorn, and some mascots I've forgotten

Did you go to LSU?

[tx_dem41]

87. No, Rice University actually.

But when you were born in La. you have purple and gold blood in ya' regardless. Obviously, they subjected you to a transplant up there in S'ville.

[Swamp Rat]

120. Yeah you rite!!!

Geaux Tigahs! :D

[jobycom]

122. Nah, I'm more longhorn. I went to MSU for three semesters as an engineer

But I co-oped two of them--which is how I wound up in Dallas.

As for the purple and gold-- I get a little sentimental when I hear the school name, and I only lived there three days, so yeah, it must be in the blood. :-)

[GumboYaYa]

116. Geaux Tigers!!!!

I grew up in Newellton, Louisiana, on the Delta, as a raging fundamentalist Christian. I went to undergrad in New Orleans where I recovered from that ailment.

[jobycom]

130. I can understand that recovery process

I started recovering in high school, but it took a lot of courage to admit I was healed, if you know what I mean. :-) My Dad about a year ago finally accepted I was an atheist, and told me he was ashamed of me. I'm glad he waited until i was 39 to tell me that.

My parents grew up in New Orleans. I've been to Newellton, though I can't remember a thing about it. My father worked on the oil rigs, so now and then we'd take him way down river to catch a helicopter or crew boat. Cool place. People are a little scary.

[Swamp Rat]

139. People are a little scary.

Yes, I used to play gigs down in Buras and Grand Isle, etc... talk about scary creatures! :scared:

[GumboYaYa]

142. "People are a little scary."

But, despite their many prejudices and vast other problems, they are some of the nicest, most genuine people in the world once you cut through the nonsense. There is not much to remeber about Newellton.

I went through the same recovery process, starting in high school with the study of evolution (no wonder the fundies hate it so much). In college I studied philosphy with the Jesuit seminarians still in search of the answers to life's big questions. I'm no atheist, but I also claim no organized religion.

[Der Blaue Engel]

8. They may call it that, but it's not the same thing

Fundies will write in their bibles, doodle in the margins, toss the book on the floor with a pile of other books, buy a new one because it's nicely leather bound, accidentally leave it on the pew and just grab another from home.

They don't have the degree of reverence for these pieces of paper that we're talking about here. They'd be offended to the same degree as if they saw you burning a US flag: pissed and morally outraged, but not made to feel violated.

[VOX]

16. Good analysis and comparisons.

Very understandable. :thumbsup:

[VOX]

11. Literal and immutable.

IMO, the fundies have created a sort of biblical idolatry, wherein the book itself is worshipped, losing anything of value from the Bronze Age tribal teachings that form its content.

[jobycom]

79. Yes, I agree, but it is still a very long way from the way the Muslims

believe in the Qur'an.

I once told a fundie he worshipped the Bible instead of God. It actually knocked him back a step, and he thought about it, and he said, "I hope I don't." Actually made him think about it.

[jeffrey_X]

162. Which version?

nfm

[Ladyhawk]

210. Walt Starr speaks the truth.

As a fundy, I was taught that the Bible is the literal word of God and that to desecrate it in any way was a terrible, terrible sin.

The OP has no clue what he / she is talking about.

[beam me up scottie]

221. I think he does

know what he is talking about. He was also a fundie-apparently there are different kinds.
ALl he was trying to do is get people to understand another culture and why they behave like they do, in other words; promote tolerance.
Instead, this turns into a religion bashing thread and he gets beaten over the head with crosses.
How did tolerance get so lost in all this hostility?

[Ladyhawk]

230. The truth is always inflamatory. n/t

[beam me up scottie]

234. He really does know a lot about islam.

I appreciated it because I don't.
(by the way, Ladyhawk-you've taught me a lot about fundies, and it scared me silly!)
Thanks.

[jobycom]

264. It is not

the dictated, actual word of God, though. Being a fundie, you'll understand how Jesus was the Word of God, and how that is different from the Bible being the word of God. For a Muslim, the Bible is the Word of God in the same way that Jesus is, not the way the Bible is.

I know exactly what I'm talking about. It's not a matter of opinion or me not understanding Christians or fundamentalists. It's a matter of people not grasping Islam. There is no similar article in Christianity, except maybe, for Catholics, the Eucharist, which is believed to be transformed into the actual body and blood of Christ. Except that the Qur'an does not have to be transformed, it just is the literal Word of God, exactly as Jesus was. Muslim theology believes that Jesus was created in a virgin as the Word of God, a direct message to humanity. But the message of the Word of God was corrupted by man, and therefore God sent the eternal Qur'an to earth in a form that could not be corrupted.

Of course, not all Muslims believe this, but it is nonetheless the underlying theology of their faith. This is different from the Bible. The Bible records God's words, the Qur'an IS God's Word.

[Roland99]

216. Ayup. Fund-A-Mentals say the Bible is unerring.

[jobycom]

263. A liberal preacher friend of mine calls them Fundamnmentalists! nr

[Pacifist Patriot]

258. There is still a difference.

One that non-Muslims will probably never truly appreciate.

[apple_ridge]

3. You need to seriously get a grip on yourself.

It consists of words written on paper and is thus just another novel.

[beam me up scottie]

4. Thank you

for explaining it thoroughly.
It is difficult for me to understand the implications because I'm an atheist, not because I was willfully ignorant.

[BlueEyedSon]

5. Whatever, dude.

You make it sound like it would be IMPOSSIBLE to flush the Qran. After all, if you flush the book, that's just pages with an interpretation/transcript printed on them.

Unless they were talking into the toilet, like a big white phone.....

[theboss]

6. I don't know any Christians who consider the Bible "just a book"

Flushing a Bible would be just as bad.

[jobycom]

13. Wow. Read the post again, and if you still don't get it, read some more

You're just wrong. The Bible holds a completely different place in the Christian religion, even amongst fundies, than the Qur'an holds in Islam. It's not a question of what you think is the truth, it's a question of whether you understand it or not. I'm not saying that to be rude--I mean, I wrote the post, so it's my fault for not explaining it well enough--but it's just not close to the same thing.

[BlueEyedSon]

18. To an atheist, it's all just *shades* of the same mental illness.

[tx_dem41]

35. Don't speak for all atheists, please.

It doesn't appear to be that way to all atheists.

[beam me up scottie]

54. Thank you.

Ditto.

[BlueEyedSon]

55. Ok, what description works best for you. "delusion"?

[beam me up scottie]

65. Why are you doing that?

I've never seen you get upset like this unless someone tried to force their beliefs on you. I really don't think that was what the op had in mind. He just wants people to understand why...nevermind.
I won't judge you, we all see things differently.

[DoNotRefill]

148. Ummm...isn't that what they are trying to do?

did you read Rummy's comments about being careful about what we say and do?

It's a direct attack on our civil liberties.

[beam me up scottie]

167. What are you talking about?

The op simply tried to explain another culture which I happen to think is important because we're torturing and killing them.
Nobody was justifying or excusing anything.
I don't understand the hostility this post has generated.
If he posted about christian beliefs I would feel the same way, would everybody else?

[tx_dem41]

66. How about "another person's beliefs"....

...just like atheism is my belief.

[erichzann]

101. Thank you, and by the way:

:hug: from a person of faith. Just because we have different beliefs doesn't mean we can't be bothers. There's more than unites us than separates us. I don't think you are dellusional, "lost" or any of those words. Likewise I appreciate it when an atheist can speak of a person of faith without being condescending and insulting. Can't we all just get along? :)

Personally, I'm just happy to be here (on this earth) and want to live the best life I can and act in compassion and kindness towards as many people as I can until I die. Surely we could all agree on those goals, right?

Sel

[tx_dem41]

114. I agree with everything you said.

It troubles me that compassion seems to be a dying trait in all people in these times.

[erichzann]

117. I know, its so heartbreaking -- all we can do is stand up.

[jobycom]

187. Man...

That's exactly why I started this thread. Thank you. I think we are cosmic neighbors in more than just our geographical history.

[erichzann]

189. Yes! And we even disagree about your original proposition

I don't agree (completely) with your OP, in that I think you're being too absolutist - I think that some christians have an attitude much much closer to some muslims than you make room for.

And I think at some point the differences become semantic at best.

But that doesn't mean I can't be your brother. And it doesn't mean that disagreement has to be a bad thing. And it doesn't mean that I can't recognize that you are intelligent, thoughful and deserve some respect.

That's why I edited one post I make - because it was too short and off the cuff, not worthy of you. :)

Have a wonderful day.

[jobycom]

192. I appreciate that, but

it's still like someone trying to convince me that a whale is the same thing as an aardvark. They are different things. Wars have been fought because people don't get that, but they are just different things.

[erichzann]

201. Well - the more you've written the more persuaded I've been

I think there are still some points where I'd want to interject from a different perspective, but I've also been persuaded by some of your points.

[DoNotRefill]

150. "Can't we all just get along?"

We can all get along right up to the point that somebody tries to convert me against my will. At that point, we have Big Trouble in Little China...

[erichzann]

191. Yes, just don't launch a "pre-emptive" war.

Nuking people of faith into the ground before they have a chance to try and convert you.

Christian: Hi Bob! I was just----

Bob: FLAME FLAME FLAME FLAME FLAME FLAME FLAME FLAME FLAME FLAME

Joe: Why did you do that Bob?

Bob: I dunno - he looked at me funny, though he might try to convert me so I needed to pre-emptively eviscerate him and completely attack his faith, his beliefs and everything he stands for and loves just to make sure he would be totally defeated before even trying that crap.

Joe: I think he just wanted to know what time it is...

:)

[beam me up scottie]

223. I think I like you.

Even if we are supposed to be mortal enemies.
:evilgrin:

[DoNotRefill]

282. Oh, no, I give fundies a wide amount of space....

and more than a few have tried to convert me to their beliefs. I generally politely explain to them that I'm not interested. As long as they understand that and either drop the subject or go away, I've got no problem with them. Now if they start screaming at me about my going to hell or being an unsaved heathen or whatever, then I have a little problem with them, but it's normally resolved peacefully, either by my leaving or the police coming. Now if one of them were to try and "smite" me for my apostasy, well, at that point they will quickly find out if their ideas about the afterlife are correct or not.

I've got friends who are fundies. They weren't fundies when we first met and became friends, but became fundies later. I don't condemn them for their conversion, but we don't talk religion or politics any more. If we did, we would no longer be friends.

[BlueEyedSon]

118. Atheism is *not* a belief, any more than bald is a hair color. Sigh.....

[geek tragedy]

129. Actually, atheism *is* a belief.

An atheist *believes* that there is no God. Since this is essentially unprovable, atheism itself also requires a leap of faith, albeit one much smaller than that required of religious folk.

[BlueEyedSon]

136. Actually, it isn't a belief, so get over it.

http://www.users.qwest.net/~jcosta3/article_dragon.htm

[tx_dem41]

141. An absolutely lovely personality you have going for you there...

it's a pleasure to meet you.

[erichzann]

151. Actually, it can be. and sometimes is - so "get over it" in your words

There are people who take the name "atheist" in what is often called the "strong" sense - who actively believe that god does not exist.

There are also people who take the name "atheist" in what is often called the "weak" sense - who do not find any compelling reason to believe in the existence of a God or Gods, a passive stance which is different than the active stance of strong atheism which says absolutely "God does not exist, period."

There has been some debate about "weak atheism" and "Agnosticism - what exactly is the difference? In the end, I would basically say that the difference is essentially semantic in nature.

In my opinion, the majority of atheists are "weak atheists" (by the way, that term is a term coined by atheists, and simply means passive instead of active, and is not perjorative) who simply "lack belief" in God or Gods, but are not making declarative propositions of their own such as "God does not exist." Saying "I find no compelling evidence to lead me to a belief in the existence of God" is not the same thing as saying "God doesn't exist." Some atheists say the former, and some the latter.

More here, from the Atheist Web:
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/intro.html

The part on "belief that god doesn't exist" and "what is agnosticism then?" are particularly good.

[geek tragedy]

154. Can you scientifically prove that no God exists?

The ultimate question of whether an omnipotent, omniscient being exists is beyond human comprehension.

[beam me up scottie]

140. Don't start that here.

Start your own thread on that subject and I'll gladly correct you.
Please.

[jobycom]

193. Insert post 190. nt.

[Zhade]

237. I'm an atheist, and I DO NOT believe as you claim I do.

I simply do not believe in any gods, because there is no convincing evidence. That does not mean I believe there are no gods, just that there is no proof of any. If it came along, I'd reconsider.

So, in summation: you're wrong. Again.

[geek tragedy]

271. You're an agnostic, not an atheist. Learn the difference. eom

[tx_dem41]

137. Thanks for your addition to the dialogue.

I have not and will not question your belief system as you obviously love to do to the belief system of others. In fact, I will defend your belief system from attack (as I have shown on this thread). And, although you attack me, you won't discourage me in the future from defending belief systems based on religion. Have a good day.

[jobycom]

190. It can be.

There are atheists who don't believe there is a God, and there are atheists who believe there is no god. I think that word means a lot of different things. Heck, most people disbelieve in at least one god, somewhere, so we are all atheists to someone.

I hate describing myself as atheist anymore. I don't even consider gods in my life. I can write about the differences between Islam and Christianity as though I believe in both or either, or neither, because they really are just parts of someone else's culture to me. I have no concept of a god anywhere inside me. When I get in those painful or scary moments where people turn to gods, I just turn to myself, or my family, or to a set of principles that's hard to explain.

It isn't that I believe nothing. I just don't know of any labels that fit anything I believe. I've had pagans tell me I'm really a pagan at heart, I've had agnostics tell me I'm agnostic, etc, including Christians and atheists.

I try to live my life according to my beliefs, and I don't try to label my beliefs for fear that I'll be trapped into acknowledging one, rather than actually believing it.

Yeah, I'm just rambling. Apologies to anyone who actually read this nonsense.

[beam me up scottie]

224. Dude, that was awesome.

:applause:

[jobycom]

236. Thanks! I don't think I've gotten that smiley before! nt.

[beam me up scottie]

250. You should get a lot of them

for posting this and sticking with it.

Amazing how much we learn about our fellow du'ers in threads promoting tolerance, isn't it?:mad:

[erichzann]

256. I really identify with something you said here:

"I hate describing myself as atheist anymore. I don't even consider gods in my life. I can write about the differences between Islam and Christianity as though I believe in both or either, or neither, because they really are just parts of someone else's culture to me."

Coming from a slightly different perspective -- I hate describing myself as a Christian anymore. Because I can write about atheism, agnosticism, or comparative religions and feel like I could identify with something from every group. I notice that my language shifts depending on who I'm talking to and I don't even mean for that to happen. If I'm talking to a traditional Christian, I find I naturally gravitate toward more traditional language to make my point. That sounds nice and all, but its hard sometimes because not everyone has the ability to compartmentalize like I do.

So I'll be making some point about what I believe should be a focus on this existence and lives lived out in compassion and empathy and use some example of Jesus performing some miracle or giving a parable. And the Christian I'm talking to will be right there with me. Then at the end, I'll say "of course, I don't interpret the scripture literally, or believe in supernatural miracles, or believe that Jesus was a god, but I believe the larger point remains the same." And it seems like most people can't get that.

Sometimes I get accused by other people of having a contradictory worldview, but in reality all that's really going on is that I believe so many of our disagreements are really about language games rather than actual point in fact disagreements. There are many times where atheists and religious folks come to similar conclusions even if they get there along a different path. Example: DU. Atheists and Religious folks both coming to the same conclusions about compassion, social justice, equality, civil liberties, peace, etc. Atheists and religious folks would give very different justifications for why they come to the conclusions they come to...but who cares? The conclusions remain the same.

So its not that I feel my worldview is contradictory -- its that I feel I am multi-lingual. I speak several different "languages."

[beam me up scottie]

257. I noticed that.

I didn't call you on it because I haven't read that many of your posts and thought maybe I was just reading too much into them.
I thought you might have been enjoying playing devil's advocate.
:7

[Baclava]

38. Some need the supernatural to explain their existence.

I survive just fine without any shamen voices in my ear.

[jobycom]

91. I doubt it. You just don't see the voice in your ear as a shaman.

But it doesn't change the fact that there is a voice in your ear. Whose? A scientist's? A Humanist's? No one develops their beliefs in a vacuum.

[Baclava]

155. Remember what it was like before you were born?

That's what it'll be like when you die.

No amount of gibberish about gods living in the sky will change that.

[jobycom]

194. Okay, and you think that relates to my post how?

As an atheist, I completely agree with that, but it has absolutely no bearing on the post above it. Did you read it?

[jobycom]

86. Interesting, since I wrote the post, and I'm an atheist...

To someone who doesn't care about others, it's all shades of the same mental illness, perhaps. But don't slander all atheists with that same accusation.

[JackRiddler]

88. Thank you BlueEyedSon

Someone had to point this out.

[beam me up scottie]

90. Yeah, really. Why bother

to try to understand why the people we are torturing and killing are upset with us...

:eyes:

[jobycom]

94. Bingo. I feel like I've wandered onto that other board. Intolerance

is intolerance. It's easy for some people to tolerate those who agree with them but condemn millions of others for being different. I'm just not used to those people pretending to be liberals.

[beam me up scottie]

100. I don't think this is a progressive board anymore.

It's getting more intolerant by the day.
And I thought they would be the ones who would tear each other apart over bigotry.

[DoNotRefill]

What about their intolerance?

I don't see many in the athiest or agnostic camp calling them "infidels" and declaring Jihad against them, do you?

You have a right to believe whatever kind of bizarre thing you like. That's your right. You can figuratively cannibalize your God on Sundays like hte Catholics do. That's fine by me. It's a little bit peculiar in my book, but as long as you're not hurting anybody else, knock yourself out. But when you start yelling about killing the heathens and infidels because they don't believe as you do, then we have a problem.

[beam me up scottie]

174. It's not about forgiveness.

It's about understanding and tolerance.

[jobycom]

195. If that was directed at me, it makes no sense

I'm an atheist. So what are you arguing? Or were you agreeing with me? Sorry, I'm really not sure.

[DoNotRefill]

280. Liberals can be intolerant too.

Ask your average Liberal about what they think should happen to the Klansmen-types that dragged James Byrd, Jr. to death behind their truck down in Jasper, Texas, and odds are good that very few of us will say "well, they're entitled to their beliefs".

Tolerance very rarely extends to people who want to kill you or people like you. That's not intolerance, that's a basic survival skill.

I'm guilty of this too. If somebody says "I'm going to kill you", and looks like they really mean it and are going to try to kill me right then and there, I have no tolerance for them or their position, and will respond as I see best to protect myself, even if it means that they will die.

"Turn the other cheek" isn't an ideal that I subscribe to. That's why I'm still alive.

[CJCRANE]

254. Who is yelling about killing the infidels?

I have lots of relatives in muslim-based countries and they don't run around yelling about "killing the infidels". They get on with their lives just like most people in Christian-based countries don't run around shouting violent quotes from the Bible or Jews shouting stuff from the Torah.

Most people of whatever religion don't even know what's in their holy books apart from a few phrases they say at Christmas/Eid etc.

[JackRiddler]

166. I don't need to try.

It's actually quite easy to understand: The people "we" (the empire falsely labeled U.S. and fronted by the Bush administration) are torturing and killing are upset with "us" ... (drumroll please)

... because "we" are torturing and killing them.

Any given straw (news of yet another outrage) could have broken the camel's back (caused riots).

As posters here have repeatedly pointed out, the Pentagon itself has said it wasn't the story of Koran flushing per se that did it. Those people were ready to riot, and it's no surprise that they did.

Of course, the Koran flushing, if it happened, qualifies as an outrage. That is, in its context: of being a device of torture. (To take an opposite example, as the work of an artist in a gallery, it would be protected speech. Ugly and nasty, but protected nevertheless.)

Beyond that, I really don't need a lecture about my failure to understand that a lot of people think this or that is the untouchable holy of holies. I have seen it first-hand, I understand it perfectly - and I find it laughable.

Among those who happen to have been born "Muslims," I do believe I side philosophically with those who don't think the Koran is the word of "God" (like, say, Salman Rushdie). Just as among those who happen to have been born "Christian," I sympathize most with those who chose to renounce their indoctrination.

Do you understand that?

[beam me up scottie]

172. A lecture?

You're offended because another DU'er tries to explain a different culture?

I think I understand perfectly.

[jobycom]

200. Actually, good post, and much like the point I was trying to make

[BlueEyedSon]

And thank you, JR. Looks like fewer people get my point than get the

original post.

Reminds me of the Star Trek where the aliens are two-tone: black on one side and white on the other. "He's INFERIOR," cries one. "You look pretty identical to me," retorts Mr Spock.

"Can't you SEE... he's black on the LEFT side!!"

:)

[beam me up scottie]

144. What is your point?

And why is it more important than the op?

[BlueEyedSon]

242. DId I say my point was important? You have me confused with someone else!

[beam me up scottie]

251. Sorry, I thought you inferred it with this :

"And thank you, JR. Looks like fewer people get my point than get the...original post."

Should more people get your point than the op's?

[MissB]

21. That flag comparison upthread is probably a good one.

You might want to include that in your OP. :shrug:

[sandnsea]

26. Wow, just a thought

Maybe YOU are the one who is wrong. Christians do view the Bible as the Word of God. You can say that Muslims would run into a burning building to save a Qu'ran, funny thing is, I never see them do that.

If you don't think it's the same, go downtown and start peeing on Bibles and see what happens.

[beam me up scottie]

28. How many mass suicides

were attempted in our prisons because of bible abuse?

[theboss]

33. That proves nothing:

1. Muslim fundamentalists in this era are a lot more fundamentalist than Christians. Christians don't currently have suicide squads (though I'm not discounting anything in the future).

2. There hasn't been Bible abuse as far as I know.

[beam me up scottie]

47. That is the point

the op was trying to make :
"Muslim fundamentalists in this era are a lot more fundamentalist than Christians"

So there IS a difference.
And as far as bible abuse, look in any hotel room desk drawer.

[DoNotRefill]

165. I don't know about that....

go to a pentecostal church where they handle serpents and speak in tongues...

There are some pretty weird Christian fundies out there...

[beam me up scottie]

175. I realize that.

Good point. But we're not invading their homes and killing them.

[JackRiddler]

218. Sorry...

As far as willingness to kill, indeed to commit genocide goes... no one tops the current crop of fundamentalist Christians who are waiting for the rapture and hoping to help it along with a few nukes, or the fundamentalist Zionists who want to tear down Al-Aqsa and "re"build the Temple. At best, it's a tie with the Muslim fundamentalists.

And I assure you, were the roles FULLY reversed - with Muslim invaders taking the Christians' countries, plundering the Christians' resources and torturing randomly incarcerated Christians on a mass scale - you would have just as many suicide bombers on the Christian side.

[beam me up scottie]

226. Okay, now you're confusing me.

I had almost made up my mind not to listen to you anymore and then you go and post something brilliant like that...

:wtf:

[JackRiddler]

228. I guess now you know my God

Her name is Eris.

;)

[beam me up scottie]

233. .

:P

[sandnsea]

39. Let's apply logic

Christianity abhors suicide. Radical Muslims promote suicide in the name of Allah. Duh.

Again, go downtown and pee on a Bible. I dare ya.

[beam me up scottie]

48. Way to miss the point.

Duh

[sandnsea]

56. Yeah, you really did

Mostly it has to do with WHO is doing the descrating. I guarantee you, if a Bible was being desecrated in a ME prison, fundies here would be shitting bricks over it. Similarly, because infidels are desecrating their Holy Scripture, it makes it all the worse. Because I have seen their homes burning and have not seen them run back in to get their Holy Scriptures, the whole argument that it is different than the Bible falls apart. The problem isn't so much that the scripture was desecrated, as it is who was doing the desecrating.

I am not saying it isn't a big deal, it is. I am saying it is equally a big deal to many Christians too. Although, most Christians wouldn't start a war over it. The fundies haven't quite moved back to the dying for Jesus mentality, although they aren't far from it.

[beam me up scottie]

64. I am an atheist,

personally I think it's all bullshit.
But I want to understand the people we are killing.
Sue me.

[sandnsea]

67. Hmmm

But don't care to understand anybody else, like Christians you disagree with. Interesting.

[beam me up scottie]

72. I understand christians,

liberal ones anyway. That includes just about everyone I know and love.
And we're not killing christians, are we?

[sandnsea]

112. liberal ones

How hard is that? Why can you muster up respect for Muslims view of the Koran, but not fundies view of the Bible, or whatever?

Yes, Christians and Muslims do have different cultures. Muslims are killing Christians all over the world. We are not killing Muslims, because they are Muslims, anywhere. Not that some of our fundies wouldn't take great joy in it, if that were the case.

[beam me up scottie]

132. How do you know who or what I respect?

And frankly I read the op because I wanted to LEARN about another culture. Why did you? To piss on it?

"Muslims are killing Christians all over the world. We are not killing Muslims, because they are Muslims"

Nice.

We ARE killing muslims. We are responsible for their deaths.
Get over your personal issues, it's not about you.

[sandnsea]

153. You don't want to learn

You want your pre-conceived notions confirmed, which is your personal issue.

You might want to dispense with the notions of good and evil. Then you would be able to see that stating the fact, that Muslims are killing Christians, isn't the same as taking a side or declaring any side good or evil. The same as stating the fact, we are not killing anybody over religion. Oil is actually much more disgusting of a reason, don't you think?

[beam me up scottie]

179. I am a pacifist atheist. Good and evil do not exist.

And I don't believe in killing ANYBODY.
All killing is disgusting to me.
So no, sorry but I don't recognize degrees when it comes to murder.
And I have no pre-conceived notions, that's why I actually LEARNED something from the op while others prefer to turn it into their own personal crucifixtion fantasy.


Tolerance is a good thing.

[Name removed]

240. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[beam me up scottie]

252. OH LOOK EVERYBODY!

I have a fan!
He must have had to look at quite a few of my posts to know my age.

I'm flattered, really.

"I'm your number one fan."

[noiretextatique]

213. acutally....we care killing muslims because they are muslim

in iraq and afghanistan.

[sandnsea]

238. No, we aren't

That is just ridiculous. I cannot believe you would say that. We are not in a holy war. We are most definitely in a global oil war. The fact that they "aren't like us" makes it alot easier to kill them. But we aren't killing them because they are brown or Muslim.

[BornLeft]

285. Well we may not be in

a holy war, but someone forgot to tell the coutries we invaded that. And actually, I am not totally sure they would believe infidels anyway.

[tx_dem41]

85. I got the point.

It was quite clear actually.

[beam me up scottie]

92. Why are the rabid atheists

trying to teach tolerance to religious folks?
The guy just tried to explain something and they fucking nail him on a cross.

[tx_dem41]

105. Thanks for the chuckle.

I agree....guess the lesson is: "Don't try to help out".

[DireStrike]

106. Because the rest of us don't particularly care about religion...

and hence, haven't participated in the thread? ;)

I read the thread, but find little I feel like commenting on.

[beam me up scottie]

146. See my post about why I want to understand the people we're killing.

Thank you.

[Anakin Skywalker]

229. Hell, I Have A Lot to Comment On

But damn it, I am just too polite and do not want to start yet another flame war on this very silly topic.

[blondeatlast]

152. You have a point, but if there was a similar incidence of Bible destructio

you would see indignation from the heart of our government (legislative body, president) and marching in the streets.

There'd be enough mass hysteria to go arund as well.

The only difference is where the believers place the blame of the act...

[beam me up scottie]

214. Hysteria, maybe.

But christian prisoners would not attempt mass suicide over it.
It is different and we need to understand why if we are ever going to make peace and keep it, IMHO.

[DoNotRefill]

161. I recall a case....

where a guy "found God" and circumsized himself in prison....with his teeth.

People do some strange stuff for religion...

[beam me up scottie]

217. As an atheist, I agree.

I do not endorse or justify anybody's religion or customs.
I am just pissed because the op wanted DU'ers to understand why abusing the koran is so volatile to fundamentalist muslims (not just this recent "riot" but last year's incidents as well) and he's been crucified for it.

[DoNotRefill]

274. Has he died yet?

because the OP is still posting. Is this the start of the Jobycomian religion??? I thought that according to dogma, crucified people had to wait three days before rising from the dead to prove their divinity...

:evilgrin:

[beam me up scottie]

286. We atheists threw out the old rule book.

We figure if we're going to start a new religion in order to implement the E.A.C. we need to put our gods on the fast track.
We're a couple of millennium behind, lots of catching up to do, don't you know.
:evilgrin:

[DoNotRefill]

289. Well, as long as your church doesn't bump heads with my church...

y'all have fun, ya hear???

[beam me up scottie]

290. Which church is yours?

nt

[DoNotRefill]

291. I'm not tellin....the First Rule of my Religion....

is "don't talk about my religion".

[beam me up scottie]

293. I understand.

People treat me differently when they find out I am part of the Evil Atheist Conspiracy.

[DoNotRefill]

295. Do you remember that old song from Dragnet?

It went something like:

"What is wrong with what we're doing?
We just like to dance
In our goat-skin pants
around this ancient ruin!"

Muahahaaaaa!!!!

/closet P.A.G.A.N.

People
Against
Goodness
And
Normalcy

or something like that...

[beam me up scottie]

301. Yes!

Had forgotten all about that!
Were you this funny yesterday and I just didn't notice it from my soapbox?

[jobycom]

102. How many Muslims and fundamentalists do you know?

Out of curiosity?

I've been a Christian, and I was raised (after converting from Catholicism) as a fundamentalist. Many of my childhood friends are. My co-workers are. I'm quite familiar with fundamentalism.

I'm now an atheist, and have been since I was seventeen. I'm 40, now.

During that time as a scholar I've studied a great deal about religions. My minor oral exams in grad school were on Islamic history, with a strong emphasis on Muslims theology. So I know a bit about Islam as well.

If you can prove to me, using logic, intelligent examples, or some direct knowledge I don't have, that I am wrong, I'll admit it. But untill I see something more convincing than a neocon-esque dogmatic claim of the sort you've made, I'm going to continue to assume I'm right.

Just as I say to neocons: Prove me wrong. And declarations and insults are not proof.

[sandnsea]

123. Oh puhleeze

I am so tired of this line. How in the world is pointing out that both Muslims and Christians revere their Holy Scriptures, neocon-esque?

Do you think I'm suggesting that it's no big deal to desecrate the Koran? Or that Muslims shouldn't be angry about it? I'm not. I only object to your claim that Christians, fundies in particular, wouldn't be equally upset if the Bible were being desecrated in the ME.

[erichzann]

131. Quite a few actually

I am friends with several Christan fundamentalists, though I am not one myself, and I am also friend a few Muslims, though I know no extremists. Fortunately because of where I work I am lucky enough to have access to more cultural diversity.

I also was raised in an evangelical Christan household with a minister father. I too have extensively studied religions - not as a past time but as part of my degree work in philosophy and religion.

I don't think the problem is proving to you that there are at least SOME Christians out there who feel the same what about their bible that SOME Muslims feel about their Q'ran -- it us ludicrous and contrary to any rational thought to dispute that. Of course there are going to be some people who feel that way about things. The problem is that you choose to assume that you're right, hence opening yourself up to confirmation bias, rather than assuming you're wrong and looking for evidence would would disprove - not prove - you're point of view.

I'm looking for evidence to disprove my view that there are some Christians who look at their Bible as fanatically as some Muslims look at their Q'ran. But I'm having a hard time finding it -- since I know directly first hand in real life both Christians and Muslims who see their respective sacred books exactly the same way.

[DoNotRefill]

171. I actually know quite a few fundie muslims....

and quite a few fundie Christians. The bit about fundies handling serpents and speaking in tongues? Been there, watched that. And people wonder why I carry a handgun with me when I'm dragged to a friend's church...

[erichzann]

96. EDIT - post worded too strong, post up top is better. (nt)

[Eloriel]

157. Care to "enlighten" us? Or is your function here just

insults and put downs?

YOUR choice, of course. Just wanted you to know that the currently chosen function isn't all that appealing.

[erichzann]

181. What the heck are you talking about?

I edited this post, which did not have insults and put downs, it simply said the OP was incredibly wrong, because I made a better worded post up above.

I don't know where you're "insults and put downs" line comes from. I think its pretty sad to flame one of the few people who bothers to take the time to edit out a post that might have been too harsh and not conducive to good dialog. Silly me.

I'm still reading your post mystified... you are apparently flaming me because not 5min after I posted a subject line-only statement, I edited it because I decided it wasn't balanced enough -- and you're flaming me for that?? :wtf:

[timtom]

202. To help bring this into focus...

according to a friend of mine who is an strong Christian AND an expert on Islam (he was a university professor and was interviewed as the resident expert in this area during the Gulf "War")....

According to him, the Qu'ran is to Islam as Jesus is to Christianity. That's the equivalency.

Remember, Jesus is believed to be the Word incarnate.

[beam me up scottie]

14. ALL of the fake christians

that we call fundies consider the bible nothing more than a tool, no matter WHAT they say.

[blondeatlast]

159. Certainly, sadly, true that. nt

[beam me up scottie]

10. C'mon folks.

The op is just trying to explain WHY muslims are reacting so violently.
I unfortunately, already understand what the fundies hold dear, and it ain't the bible.

[BlueEyedSon]

15. You dont think there would be violence if the situation was turned around?

I AM SURE.

[beam me up scottie]

20. All I gotta do is watch

all the tvangelists pissing on the bible all day long to know it's different.
By the way, is there a Koran in every hotel room?

[bvar22]

12. jobycom is correct.

Reread his post. There is a distinction.

It is difficult to understand cultural differences. The natural instinct is to view them through the filters of our own cultural biases and experience. The comparison to "What You Know" (Fundamental Christians)is understandable and also telling.

It would be profitable to listen to someone who sees the difference instead of insisting that your view is the ONLY view.

[Walt Starr]

22. I disagree, there is no difference

There are Christians who would rush into a burning house to save a Gideon's Bible.

[bvar22]

34. A handful of Christian fanatics?

Would Millions of Christians behave that way.
Many Millions of Muslims would.
The Christians in OUR culture that would do this ARE seen as Fanatics.
The Muslims who would do this are MAINSTREAM in their culture. Muslims are EXPECTED to behave that way as a religious and cultural dictate.


It doesn't NEED to make sense to us, nor do we need to judge them as somehow inferior or less educated, or dumber. Most Muslims see our culture as inferior....godless and hedonistic.
Who is RIGHT?

[Walt Starr]

42. I don't see "Millions of Muslims" doing it now

I see a bunch of fanatics getting violent.

I believe millions of Christians would protest. I believe there could be thousands of Christians who would react violently.

Again, I see absolutely no difference.

[CJCRANE]

17. On a side note:

Muslims believe that the Bible is also the word of God, however they believe that errors have crept in due to editing, mistranslation etc.

[jobycom]

204. No, not really

The Bible to them is hopelessly corrupt, and it follows the wrong son of Abraham, so everthing after the Isaac/Ishmael thing and before the Gospels is wrong. The Gospels have some truth about Jesus, but the letters of Paul and his gang aren't accepted.

It's more like they revere the figures of the Bible than the Bible, and they don't in any way consider to have ever been the Word, in the way the Qur'an is.

In fact, some believe Jesus was the Word of God, just as Christians do and the Bible proclaims, and therefore the Qur'an is more like Jesus than like the Bible.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Magistrate]

25. The Problem With this, Sir, Is Simple

There is something very wrong, from a left and progressive view, with the notion that any disparraging treatment of any religious text be viewed as a matter for execution under law. That such a belief is widely held, anywhere, in regard to anything, is a problem. Persons who believe in a religion have no right to enforce their views on others by law, or by mob or any other form of violence, and persons who are willing to do so are a problem, regardless of what confession it is that they profess.

[Walt Starr]

29. And the legal point is why picking the ME for endless war works so well

for the fascists.

Much, if not most of the cultural bugaboos in the ME are anathema to those who live in America. We cannot perceive being put to death because we aren't a part of the majority religion. We cannot conceive (though we are getting closer) to religious texts being the basis of law. We cannot conceive of women being relegated to the status of property.

[bvar22]

62. Go to your US History books.

You won't need to go back very far to find women as chattel, or religion as a basis of Law, or deaths from religious persecutions. Its not so inconceivable.

[Walt Starr]

76. That's stories in old books

to most Americans.

Think of it, the majority of the population did not live in a time where these things were commonplace.

[blondeatlast]

169. Most Americans see our history as little more than mythology.

You, I, jobycom, and Walt may know better, but I suspect we are more eddicated than the avurge Murkin.

[beam me up scottie]

31. Sir, respectfully,

I believe the op was just trying to explain WHY there are violent protests by Muslims regarding abuse of the Koran, not excusing or justifying them.

[theboss]

36. The protests don't have anything to do with Islam, I think

Christians of the 11th Century used to intentionally commit acts that would make them martyrs. Modern Christians, by and large, do not.

The protests have to do with the culture of the Modern Islamic World, I think - which is caught up in equal parts anger, helplessness, anti-Americanism, and religious fervor. If the people in Afghanistan lived in the equivalent of Reston, Virginia, they would be upset over the allegations but likely not violent.

[tx_dem41]

37. In other words....

you are dismissing the Islamists' stated (and demonstrated) sincerity of their beliefs and stating that material wealth/goods will soften their beliefs.....

And, we wonder why they don't like us.

[theboss]

46. I think there is no doubt that affluent societies are less reactionary

People with a stake in the world have more to lose. The perplexing part of the 9/11 hijackers were that they came from Middle Class families largely. So, there may be a Saudi Arabia/Texas exception to this theory.

[The Magistrate]

50. Material Wealth And Goods, Sir

Do tend to have that effect, and operate in that matter i at least the majority of instances.

As to the sincerity of belief demonstrated by people who consider me kaffir and abomination, my inclination is to regard it as a bad thing, and not much worth respect, save in strategic and tactical calculations as to how it may be checked and set at naught.

[beam me up scottie]

68. I guess I was thinking more of the

reactions reported from the prisons last year. This is not the first time violence broke out over koran abuse by the guards.
Like I said, I'm an atheist and I'm not offended by explanations.
He didn't try to justify the violence, just explain it.

[LondonAmerican]

43. hear, hear!

to hell with all blasphemy laws!

[TahitiNut]

99. I'd suggest it warrants treatment under law equal to "fighting words" .

The "fighting words" statutes acknowledge that there're insults and verbal offenses so vile as to apologize immediate ("hot blood") defensive retaliation. No, this does not warrant subsequent ("cold blood") retaliation or even legal preemptive prohibitions, imho. When, however, it is an agent of government itself engaging in such behavior I think it clearly calls for expulsion or disbarment - including anyone who, under color of authority, promulgates such behavior.

In short, it should be CFR-level, not USC-level.

[The Magistrate]

243. There Is Something To What You Say, My Friend

However, my patience with people claiming religious warrant for their violence against, and oppression of, other people, has worn rather thin of late.

The "fighting words" doctrine, though established, is not a favorite of mine, for the fact is that almost never are people actually unable to control themselves in the face of words; they generally size up whether they think they win the punch-up with the person who has levied the insult before "losing control"....

"I want to find some small man, and lick him!"

[TahitiNut]

266. While I generally agree, that's a case of "doubt in favor of the accused"

... since we must honor the instances where the person's control is absent, imho. I believe it's a case of being far better that some (ethically) guilty gain reprieve (due to limitations in ascertaining intent and deliberation) than that some innocent be doubly insulted. I'd further observe that "freedom of religion" would be meaningless if adherents were subject to such treatment, with their only recourse under law being reimbursement of the market value of the item so treated.

These cases smack of an assault on the core and conscience of the victim, despite there being no medically ascertainable harm. I'm not discussing any depersonalized case, for instance, where the item held sacred is either not individually owned or is done outside their presence. I'm limiting my regard to instances where the person's own item held sacred (according to some legitimately held religious belief) is, in their view, deliberately 'desecrated'.

I do not extend similar regard to such items as national flags and political symbols, however. In such cases, the balance tips unquestionably in favor of "freedom of speech" where political speech is paramount. Our freedoms must always be balanced, the practice thereof not to infringe upon another's practice.

At least that's my reasoning on this particular case. If we all saw it the same way, life would be boring. :D

[The Magistrate]

268. It Would Indeed Be Boring, Sir

My own view of history, and common practice in much of the world, though, inclines me to draw less of a distinction between religious and political views, particularly where people insist their religion dictate political life and social arrangements. Liberty of conscience is, at botom, a private affair, it seems to me; it certainly cannot be extended to things that would trammel the consciences of others.

This particular matter is complicated by the existance of a state of war. It is all very well for us to state, and it may even be true, that the United States is not at war with Islam, but there is certainly a sect of Islam at war with the United States. War, whatever legalities may apply to its conduct, necessarily degrades the parties of each side in the eyes of the other, and necessarily creates a climate in which neither side can expect the slightest human respect to be shown what it values: in a mental environment where people are killed on sight, and that considered a laudable and proper act, mere sacred symbols will hardly be shown a greater respect by participants.

This does not mean that an action such as this is a wise one, or a legal one, and indeed, it is probably neither wise nor legal, but it is the sort of thing that can be expected to occur, and with wearying regularity, as the conflict draws on.

[Name removed]

269. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

244. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

245. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

246. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

247. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

248. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

249. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[uppityperson]

253. Did you really mean to post the same thing 13 times?

wow. be careful or the spam catcher will dump you out.

[jobycom]

207. So, if millions of people in a culture

completely disagree with your ideas of rights, and claim a completely different set of rights, then you are right even for their culture, and they are wrong, even for their culture? I'll have to dwell on that a while, but it seems somehow undemocratic to me.

[The Magistrate]

239. So Long As their View Of Rights, Sir

Includes the right and duty to kill me for expressing a view contrary to their's, then, yes, Sir, their view is wrong and mine right....

[DoNotRefill]

275. I don't know about "right" or "wrong" per se...

but your view doesn't violate their rights, and their view certainly violates your rights...

[theboss]

296. Yes, entire cultures can be wrong

The Jews have had to put up with entire cultures being wrong about Judaism for centuries.

The entirity of Saudi Arabia and most of the Muslim world is wrong in regards to women's rights.

Most of the United States was wrong regarding the treatment of blacks for centuries. Most of the US is wrong regarding the treatment of homosexuals today.

[Darranar]

261. I agree with that...

Certainly nobody who does it deserves to be executed, it probably shouldn't be illegal either.

But it is viciously immoral, because it is basically a vicious attack on somebody else's religion, a statement that what many see to be the divine word is no better than trash.

The use of it in interrogations is not only disgusting on a moral level, but highly likely to be counterproductive.

[Avalux]

27. Your title should be reworded -

it's misleading. It's apparent you mean to draw a comparison between Muslims/Koran and Christians/Bible; however, some may not see it that way.

I understand - and so do trained interrogators - that defacing the Koran would be a very effective tactic in order to gain information from Muslim detainees. I believe they've done it, I believe the story is true.

[Coastie for Truth]

30. My Iranian Shia friend explained it to me this way

1. The "Qur'an" is the exact word of God spoken into the Prophet'e ear.

2. The "Koran" is the vernacular translation for easy human reference.

3. The "PDF" is the copy of the "Qur'an", the Iranian Koran, and the English Koran - that I can print out and show you.

4. The "HTML" is the copy of the English Koran that is linked to the Qur'an, the Iranian Koran, the English Koran, the "Modern Arabic (i.e., Egyptian academic Arabic) Koran" and lots of other things and articles, including Jewish and Christian writings.

He also said that there are web sites that have the vernacular Koran (PDF) "in every language known to man."

[jobycom]

208. LOL That's good.

[paineinthearse]

40. Thank you for this information.

It gives me a new perspective.

Nominated.

[beam me up scottie]

52. Nominated.

With warning label for flamers: Shut up and learn something.

[Nihil]

279. Hear hear!

> With warning label for flamers: Shut up and learn something.

I rarely post in GD partly due to available time and partly due to an
allergy to the pointless ignorant flaming that has been demonstrated
so often in this otherwise informative thread.

The OP was not only helpful & informative but obviously long overdue,
a point reinforced by many of the subsequent responses.

Well done Jobycom and the contributors who have maintained a truly
liberal, democratic, enlightening tolerance for others.

Nihil

[beam me up scottie]

287. Some of the replies certainly make me think twice

about starting any threads promoting tolerance.
I think I'm suffering from the same allergy and Benadryl isn't working.
Maybe a lobotomy will work.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tx_dem41]

45. Ummm....where did he say that HE believed it?

He is trying to state what the Islamists believe. Its amazing how many people are not "getting" the OP.

[theboss]

51. And Christians believe the same thing

We believe that God - through Man - wrote the Bible. It's the "Word of God."

Now, the Torah may be considered in a different context. (Though I must admit some ignorance here). I think the Torah is acknowledge as the word of man, while the Old Testament is the word of God. Correct me, if I am wrong.

[tx_dem41]

71. Ahhh...you said "through Man". Congratulations...

you just stated the distinction (if you tack on and "written by Man". Now the question is: "Do you get it?"

[theboss]

180. It's still the unquestioned word of God

I have to admit not being an expert on Islam. Was Muhammad handed the Koran by Allah fully written? Otherwise, I assumed it was the same process.

[jobycom]

212. Yes, he was handed the Qur'an. That's exactly it!

Yes, Muhammad was handed the Qur'an, through Recitation, fully written, though it was revealed over time. It is a tennant of Islam that Muhammad was illiterate, and the actual Qur'an was not written down until the Caliphate of Uthman, the third successor after Muhammad's death. Before then it was memorized.

But the Qur'an is believed to be one text, eternal, complete in its entirety when Allah began to recite it (or actually, had an angel recite it, because Muhammad would not have survived hearing Allah's voice).

THAT is the difference. It is not the inspired word of God. It is the voice of God.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

75. amazed? no

disappointed? yes

[jobycom]

215. Would it matter? The post is about what Muslims believe, not me. nt.

[ComerPerro]

44. Same deal with the Bible

That's the trouble, really.

They are all the literal word of God.

[Ashy Larry]

49. All of this is irrelevant

if you believe the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Richard Myers, or U.S. Army Lieutenant General Karl Eikenberry, commander of the Combined Forces in Afghanistan, both of whom stated that the protests were not related to the Newsweek story.

Air Force General Richard Myers told reporters at the Pentagon May 12 that he has been told that the Jalalabad, Afghanistan, rioting was related more to the ongoing political reconciliation process in Afghanistan than anything else.

According to initial reports, the situation in Jalalabad began on May 10 with peaceful student protests reacting to a report in Newsweek magazine that U.S. military interrogators questioning Muslim detainees at the Guantanamo detention center “had placed Quran s on toilets, and in at least one case flushed a holy book.” By the following day the protests in the city had turned violent with reports of several individuals killed, dozens wounded, and widespread looting of government, diplomatic and nongovernmental assets.

However, Myers said an after-action report provided by U.S. Army Lieutenant General Karl Eikenberry, commander of the Combined Forces in Afghanistan, indicated that the political violence was not, in fact, connected to the magazine report.

http://usinfo.state.gov/is/Archive/2005/May/13-299433.html

Another similar article here:
http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-05-12-voa74.cfm

[redqueen]

58. Yay!

:thumbsup:

[redqueen]

53. Who cares?! The riots weren't about the Quran!

http://usinfo.state.gov/usinfo/Archive/2005/May/12-273892.html?chanlid=washfile


Afghan Riots Not Tied to Report on Quran Handling, General Says

Army investigating allegations of mishandling at Guantanamo Bay facility

By Jacquelyn S. Porth
Washington File Staff Writer

Washington – The chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff says a report from Afghanistan suggests that rioting in Jalalabad on May 11 was not necessarily connected to press reports that the Quran might have been desecrated in the presence of Muslim prisoners held in U.S. custody at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Air Force General Richard Myers told reporters at the Pentagon May 12 that he has been told that the Jalalabad, Afghanistan, rioting was related more to the ongoing political reconciliation process in Afghanistan than anything else.

According to initial reports, the situation in Jalalabad began on May 10 with peaceful student protests reacting to a report in Newsweek magazine that U.S. military interrogators questioning Muslim detainees at the Guantanamo detention center “had placed Quran s on toilets, and in at least one case flushed a holy book.” By the following day the protests in the city had turned violent with reports of several individuals killed, dozens wounded, and widespread looting of government, diplomatic and nongovernmental assets.

However, Myers said an after-action report provided by U.S. Army Lieutenant General Karl Eikenberry, commander of the Combined Forces in Afghanistan, indicated that the political violence was not, in fact, connected to the magazine report.

[beam me up scottie]

60. What about what was reported

in the prisons last year? And not just at gitmo.
This is hardly the first time we've heard about the reaction to prison guards and interrogators abusing the koran.
Muslims do react differently and I really want to know why.

[redqueen]

61. Do they?

How?

If the incidents involving abuse of the Quran have been known, then why all of a sudden with the riots... answer: because the riots weren't about the claim in this story!

[beam me up scottie]

82. I'm not talking about this riot, I agree with you on that

But there were many incidents, including reports of attempted mass suicides because of koran abuse by prison guards last year. They were all well documented. That is why I'm trying to understand this.
I am an atheist, it's very difficult to process this kind of devotion so I appreciated the op trying to explain it.
No judgments here.
Peace

[TWiley]

63. That was my instinct from the start.

See the crowd riot?
Watch the bustapo attach a lie to the photo.

This has become standard Republican policy. I believed it as much as if they had invoked Clinton into this discussion.

It is probably a riot to protest American interference.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Eloriel]

80. Do you eat in the bathroom? Store your food there?

Sheesh. It isn't about whether or not "Alla made colons," it's about the proper place for things. You don't take something sacred and defile it that way, by mixing it with human waste. You just don't.

And I frankly find the hypothetical question of your concluding sentence demeaning, mocking and inappropriate.

[hfojvt]

163. we all have a certain sensibility about those things

which do not raise to the level of scatalophobia. If it is true that they think they are "too good to do janitorial work" then that is an attitude which I think deserves to be mocked.

I think the one pundit had a point when he said that "we have known for some time that PEOPLE were being mistreated at these places, but they take to the streets when they find out a BOOK has been defiled". I feel a duty to mock people who make icons more important than human life.

[beam me up scottie]

231. " I feel a duty to mock people

...who make icons more important than human life"

That's wonderful! You're qualified to be a prison guard and find yourself amongst such wonderful humans as pvt grainger and pvt england!

Happy koran burning!

[yankeedem]

59. I understand what you are saying, I think

Whether we believe that a book should hold that amount of reverence, that is a story for another day. The point is that many Muslims do, and it is a particular affront to them to desecrate the Qur'an.

What sprung to mind is how Catholics would feel if Muslims tossed the Host down the loo, or how Jews may feel if a Torah is descrated. That would be, IMO, a more apt analogy than comparing the Qur'an to the Bible.

[JackRiddler]

81. If this is your idea of "liberal"...

I'm going to stick with the original enlightenment of Diderot (you know, strangling the last king with the guts of the last priest and that stuff).

People believe a lot of exotic stuff. And? By your logic, Salman Rushdie had the fatwa coming to him.

If I point out that some Arabian merchant speaking in tongues 1500 years ago and demanding obedience, conquest and tribute sounds more like a scam than God's work (whatever the nice philosophy that may be attached), then I got it coming, too, eh?

Imagine I started a thread like this:

"Okay, once and for all. Fetuses are full-fledged human beings and abortion is murder."

then arguing that this is what certain religious people believe, so we have to respect it.

Torture is the issue here, by the way. If the Koran flushing was part of an art show, I'd say it's protected speech. Since it was (allegedly) part of a torture... that's what makes it reprehensible.

[snooper2]

83. If it looks like a book, feels like a book, and drops like a book,

It's a book, nothing more...

sheesh....

[erichzann]

93. Umm...what you described is IDENTICAL to what is believed about the Bible.

By just about every mainstream Christian demonination I'm familiar with.

"it is flushing the literal, actual, eternal word of God."

That's exactly what is claimed about the bible by most Christians. That's why you hear Christians refering to it as the "word of god" or "god's word."

[GumboYaYa]

98. The bible was written over 1,500 years by many different people.

2 Timothy 3:15-17 says that the Bible was God's inspiration, meaning that it is written by men based on ther interpretation of the will of God as revealed to them. Many of the early Christian scholars wrote of the difference between the essence and existence of God. God reveals his existence to humans all the time in their individual lives and humans interpret that existence. Regardless, it is not possible for humans as such to understand the essence of God as it would require becoming god oneself, an impossibility for humans.

The Koran on the other hand was transcribed by Muhhamad as relayed directly from Allah. It is the existence of Allah. There is a massive difference here for those not too intentionally obtuse to consider it.

The right analogy is not to compare the Koran to the Bible, but to compare the Koran to Christ himself. Just as Christ is the word of God made flesh in Christian ideology, the Koran is the word of God made text in Islamic ideology. If you want to understand the reaction in the Islamic world to the flushing of the Koran, don't think of someone burning the Bible, think of someone burning an effigy of Christ hanging on the cross.

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CJCRANE]

225. Islam is not a cult -

it is a culture of a billion people just like Christianity is a culture of two billion people. Most of these people go about their day to day lives and don't really know or care what it says on page 52 (or whatever) of the Bible or Koran.

A few fundamentalists having a riot in Kabul doesn't represent the whole culture just as the Waco massacre doesn't represent Christian culture.

On edit: what I'm trying to say is - not all people in muslim countries are fundamentalists who study their holy books 24 hours a day. I have relatives in a couple of muslim countries and they do the same stuff as everyone else: try to hold down a job, look after their families, they watch crappy movies occasionally just like eveyone else, the kids play videogames, some drink, some are alcoholic, some have affairs, some are gay etc. They probably watch the news as much as the average American, i.e. they're more interested in their own lives than international politics, religion etc.

[Fescue4u]

267. As I said, its just my opinion. You're free to disagree

I base my *opinion* on the behavior of its members.

Nonetheless, I proably went to far in expressing my opinion.

The point that I wanted to express, was simply that the ideas and beliefs of Quoran, Bible or Torah are whats important...Not the physical manifestation produced on paper.


As I said, if torturing a book is a Sin, then the folks who did it must answer, and its silly for others to kill over the sin of others. (of course if torturing a book is NOT a sin, then SURELY killing over it is an even worse offense)

[CJCRANE]

272. I understand your point

about religious fundamentalism. The point I'm trying to make is that most people in muslim countries aren't running around frothing at the mouth about religion/politics just like all Americans/Christians don't run around ranting like Ann Coulter/Jerry Falwell etc.

Most of 'em have jobs to do, kids to look after, movies to take back to the video library, bills to pay etc. just like everyone else.

[DoNotRefill]

277. That's very true....

MOST Muslims don't run around screaming for Jihad or whatever. But those that DO are a very scary proposition, and when they espouse killing people for destroying a book, ANY book, they are calling for the violation of basic human rights, just as they are violating basic human rights when they try somebody in a "religious" court and stone them to death for exercising their basic human rights...

I don't think any of us have a problem with the muslim equivalent of "Joe Sixpack". It's the ones who are acting as the muslim version of the Spanish Inquisition that worry us. That whole "repent your sins, convert to our way of thinking or doing things, or we will kill you!" attitude is somewhat problematic, don't you think? They have the right to believe whatever they want, but forcing their beliefs on others upon threat of death takes their beliefs out of what they are entitled to have, and puts it smack dab into the middle of infringing upon the basic human rights of others. If the 700 Club folks started copying their tactics, they'd all quickly end up in prison, yes?

[donco6]

115. Anything that causes people to act this way . . .

is evil. I have no use for it either way.

[SheepyMcSheepster]

124. wow, get out the pitch forks!

thanks for pointing this out jobycom, i think it is an important distinction to make.

[beam me up scottie]

149. Hey! Another tolerant atheist.

We're not a myth after all.
:evilgrin:

[Swamp Rat]

160. Isn't a "myth" a female moth?

I hope I got that queshton rite on my exam... :shrug:

[beam me up scottie]

206. OH SO NOW YOU'RE BASHING FEMINISTS?

sorry, couldn't resist!
:evilgrin:


To whom it may concern: My post is a sarcastic attempt at humor and I in no way believe that Swampy hates feminists or women either.

[SheepyMcSheepster]

170. i will not tolerate your name calling!

:sarcasm:

on second thought, yes i will!
indeed i am very much an atheist who just wants to get along.

[donheld]

125. I think you're dead wrong

In the mind of Fundy/evangelical Xtians "it is flushing the literal, actual, eternal word of God" just like you're saying the Qur'an is.

[Quixote1818]

197. I agree 100% nt

[jobycom]

222. No

It would be more like flushing the living Jesus down a toilet. Fundies and other Christians consider Jesus the Word of God, in the same way that Muslims (who also consider Jesus the Word of God) consider the Qur'an the Word of God.

Sure fundies would get upset if you flushed the Bible, but they get upset over everything.

[DoNotRefill]

278. Are you suggesting that Jesus can't swim???

I guess that explains the whole walking on water bit.....he wasn't performing a so-called "miracle", he just couldn't swim, so he ran very fast over the water....


Thanks, that explains a lot.

:evilgrin:

[Mizmoon]

294. I agree and I think the original post is offensive n/t

[XemaSab]

126. Sort of like

putting a cross into a jar of pee?

[Jack_DeLeon]

133. IMO the problem lies...

with the people who have that belief.

[DoNotRefill]

135. You say it's the actual word of God...

I say it's psychotic fiction.

Which one of us is right? Well, I sure think I am...

Anybody who would kill people over a book needs about 500 years in time out...

[Swamp Rat]

156. Suggestion: Ask the MODS to move this to the Religion forum

I think this is a very important discussion and I would like to read more, but the wingnuts will arrive soon and use your thread to bash Muslims and "The Qur'an." Pretty soon you'll be reading posts about how "they" used it to kill for half a millenia.

Wingnuts WANT an us vs. them debate. Dittohead buttwipes love this divisive rhetoric.

[beam me up scottie]

235. ack!

too late!
:hide:

[Raksha]

158. An example from outside of both Islam and Christianity might be useful.

Orthodox Jews take a very similar attitude to the Torah scroll. For those who don't already know this, the Torah is the five books of Moses, i.e. the first five books of the Old Testament. The scroll on which these books are written is the holiest object in Judaism. It can only be written (in Hebrew, of course) on parchment made from the skin of a kosher animal and using ink made according to an ancient formulation, unchanged for thousands of years. This ink is NOT waterproof, so you have to be careful not to allow the scroll to get wet. If a single mistake is made in transcribing a page, the entire page is discarded and done over again. All of this is done because the Torah is believed to be the literal Word of God as given to the Israelites at Mount Sinai.

The Nazis were well aware of the reverence given to the Torah scrolls, and to torment religious Jews (especially rabbis) they used to force them to dance and/or urinate on the scrolls.

But for all that, the Torah is STILL a physical object, and it isn't the holiest "object" in the world either. The holiest "object" is a living human body. This probably indicates a fundamental distinction between Judaism and both Christianity and Islam, because a Jew would never sacrifice his/her life for a Torah scroll.

In fact, we are commanded not to do that. It is said that if you are in danger of freezing to death and the only available source of fuel is a Torah scroll, you should burn the scroll. To sacrifice your own life for what is after all a physical object would be considered idolatry.

--Linda

[Jack_DeLeon]

164. Hmm, no wonder Muslims have so much problems...

if thier god can be flushed down the toilet.
Flushing the Qur'an is not flushing a book, a Bible, a symbol, a text, or a reprint--it is flushing the literal, actual, eternal word of God. It is flushing God into a place most Muslims consider vile and unclean, in a way even more dramatically than Americans do.

I definately believe in a God of some sort, but IMO people who believe that anything man made is somehow God definately have problems.

[beam me up scottie]

209. Thank you for that wonderful example of

religious tolerance.

I won't give you my opinion of what kind of problems I believe you deists have because that would be intolerant, rude and inappropriate.

inserting waiver here explaining that I do not believe deists in general have problems and I was merely using the poster's own words to illustrate a point.

[athena]

168. jobycom is absolutely right.

I'm an atheist and don't personally believe that the Koran is the word of any god, but it's important to understand how Muslims view the Koran. What's so hard to get about respecting someone else's beliefs without necessarily sharing them?

Muslims are not even allowed to touch the Koran with their hands without performing the ritual cleansing first. (This involves washing one's face, hands, feet, arms, ears, etc. and is rather time-consuming.) A person who has not performed the ritual cleansing is not considered clean enough to touch or read the Koran. The cleansing is annulled and has to be repeated after one goes to the bathroom. Now think about what it means to a Muslim when the Koran is flushed down a toilet.

Muslims even consider it a sin to place a Koran on the floor, or lower than where one would normally sit. If you visit a Muslim household, you will see that the Koran is always on a table or a shelf. It's also likely to be kept in a bag or cloth so that people won't accidentally touch it without first performing the ritual cleansing.

In the eyes of a Muslim, flushing a Koran down a toilet is worse, unthinkably worse, than even sexually humiliating a Muslim.

[erichzann]

184. Will people PLEASE stop saying "Muslims"

Muslims this Muslims that...

NOT ALL MUSLIMS ARE LIKE THIS.

My god people, we who are on the left side of the specturm really ought not adopt the same kind of sweeping-generalization language about other beliefs or cultures that the right does.

Islam is not a monolith. Some muslism are not allowed to touch the Koran before a ritual of cleansing because of their beliefs. Some are. Since I have visited a Muslim household, more than one, many times, I can tell you that just like Christianity has a wide spectrum of belief from the very conservative to the fairly liberal, so Islam too has the same spectrum -- in one household I see the Koran faithfully - placed high and protected from accidental touching. In another household the Koran is on the coffee table.

[athena]

205. Sorry for generalizing, but

I never met a Muslim who would touch a Koran without first performing the ritual cleansing. And the Muslims I've met weren't particularly fundamentalist either. They didn't pray much or go to the mosque, and some didn't even fast, but they all followed the "no touching while unclean" rule. In fact, my impression was that an ultra-liberal Muslim would be much more likely not to own a Koran at all than to own one and leave it on the coffee table.

Anyway, the cleansing aspect was not discussed earlier in the thread, and I believe it suggests why some people may get very upset when a Koran is flushed down the toilet.

[Karenina]

220. Yes, there IS that!!!

;-) What I find interesting in this thread is the resistance to accepting a very insightful, vicarious OP about how others in this world "feel." I tell ya, Erichzann, NOTHING ANNOYS ME MORE than pouring out my deepest, darkests to a confidante and having that person say "Oh, you shouldn't feel like that." How I FEEL in any gives moment is one o' dem ISES that don't depend on what IS means. ;-) The feeling IS. It must be open-heartedly accepted at face-value before any deconstruction can occur.

What we are REALLY discussing here is empathy and Zärtlichkeit.

[jobycom]

227. Yeah, great point. I didn't know this would be over 200 posts long

Or I would have included my standard disclaimer about Islam being less homogenous than Christianity and there being lax Muslims just like lax Christians, etc.

Thanks.

[Quixote1818]

196. How many people in Afghanistan read Newsweek?

Until the Bush Administration made a big deal about this it probably had gone unnoticed in the the Middle East. You can thank the Bush Administration for calling attention to it and ultimately leading to any deaths down the road and all for political gain of course.

[KittyWampus]

198. The Torah Is Also Meant To Be Read Only IN Hebrew Using Gematria

[KFC]

203. I might agree if there were only one Koran.

And it appeared out of nowhere. Or it floated around or something. But you can buy as many Korans as you want down at the Koran store. It is simply the Muslim playbook, nothing more.

[athena]

211. And what makes you such an authority on the subject? (N/T)

[Debbi801]

241. I understand what you're saying. What do you consider the Torah?

Not the Old Testament that it has been translated into. But, the actual Torah scroll, written in Hebrew?

Thanks,
Debbi

[foo_bar]

259. according to observant Jews, the "literal, actual" word of "G-d"

as revealed to Moses, worthy of literal scrutiny by Kaballah types for teh-ultimate-god-account-passwordz. But the theological difference between rescuing a Koran and a Torah from their respectively burning houses of worship is academic where beheading isn't concerned. It's really "why do they hate us?" plus "why would you telegraph a jihad in advance, anyway?"

[mzmolly]

260. The Ten Commandments are supposedly the word of God too.

So is much of what's written in the Bible ... supposedly.

[Orsino]

262. Analogue, not equivalent.

As the official repository of the Word of God, it quacks like a Bible. That the text is treated with greater reverence by some portion of believers doesn't impress me as a big deal. I'm sure there are a few Christians who hold similar views about their attractively leather-bound holy write, too.

[morgan2]

276. either way its a BOOK

I could write the Koran out in feces if I so chose. Does that mean muslims should riot? No, that would be ridiculous. Maybe they'd think I'm weird or going to hell, but thats not their job to send me there. Its the same as the artist who painted jesus with some kind of animal dung, it was weird, but it was still just a painting. No reason to go burn the artists house down or kill him. Having your religion insulted is not a reason for violence. It may not be a nice thing to do, but violence is not an acceptable response. Interogation is a dirty business, this is hardly the worst thing anyone has ever done.

Flushing a Koran down the toilet is not an offense, its a symbolic act meant to intimidate and disrespect the interogated. The only reason people are making a stink out of it in the Muslim world is political. The Jerry Falwell types are jumping on this for their own gain, don't play into their hands.

[beam me up scottie]

288. How YOU feel about it is irrelevant

The op is trying to tell us WHY the muslims react the way they do.
And are you unaware of the violent reactions documented in the prisons last year? This isn't the first time we've enraged the muslim community by destroying something they consider sacred.
It is a despicable tactic that does nothing but degrade and humiliate the prisoner, who in MANY cases is innocent.

[HarrietBrown]

281. I read this thread yesterday and don't have time to read the new posts

today, so forgive me if someone has said this, but when I read the original post's explanation it reminds me of transubstantiation in the Catholic church--the wafer IS the body of Christ after the priest consecrates it. The wine IS the blood of Christ. When we couldn't get that into our heads as kids, my mom used to tell us, "Well, it's just one of the mysteries of the church--you're not supposed to understand it." I still don't get it, but it does seem like the Koran being the literal word of god may be a similar to the Catholic concept or "mystery" of the wafer "being" a body whereas, the bible conveys the word of god but is physically a book.

[DoNotRefill]

292. Doesn't that make all catholics that take communion....

into theoretical cannibals?

"shut up, Junior, and eat your God..."

[knitter4democracy]

299. That was one of the reasons the Romans persecuted us.

In what was heard outside of churches early on, they thought we were having orgies (giving the kiss of peace on the cheek) and committing murder and cannibalism (Communion). That got spread around and helped contribute to all of the executions and persecutions of Christians in the early Church.

Of course, that's not how we look at it, but I can see how it could be taken that way.

[Cocottelle]

283. Thank You

I learned a lot from your post

[Moderator]

300. I am locking this thread...

flamewar.