Many millions of Muslims 'fundamentally incompatible with the modern world', says Tony Blair
Source: UK Independent
Tony Blair has said that "many millions" of Muslims hold a viewpoint that is "fundamentally incompatible with the modern world."
Rejecting arguments that Isis is simply "tens of thousands of brainwashed crazies," he continued: "[Isis] does not seek dialogue but dominance. It cannot therefore be contained. It has to be defeated."
To mitigate against such attacks, the ex-PM argued for "active on-the-ground military support" for Arab armies, stating that Isis "have to be crushed."
He also called for the creation of a pan-national anti-terror force, saying: "We must build military capability able to confront and defeat the terrorists wherever they try to hold territory. This is a challenge for the West."
Read more: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/many-millions-of-muslims-fundamentally-incompatible-with-the-west-says-tony-blair-a6954796.html
Sadly, there are plenty of DUers (not Freeper trolls) who believe this, too.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
EX500rider
(10,891 posts)So you think people who want the death penalty for leaving their religion and are OK with stoning homosexuals and adulterer's are compatible with current western civilization?
Zira
(1,054 posts)As soon as we acknowledge that a very small percentage are like that, racist decide across the board, this is what Islam stands for and then declare all followers of Islam like this.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)Just about every major religion seems to have it's extremists. We've got the Christian Right here that wants homosexuals dead as well.
The fact is, the majority are fine, the vocal violent minority of them will always exist as well. That's just the bane of religion. Corrupt men twisting it's message for their own gain.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)The laws for killing gays aren't on the books here in the US - if someone did that, they'd go to jail. In some of these Muslim countries, it's the state that will kill the gays and the person responsible for turning them in would get a fucking parade. You don't get to compare the two and call them the same. Even it's only 1% of Muslims, out of 1.6 billion, that makes Tony Blair absolutely right - there are millions who aren't compatible with western values.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)all it takes is for religion to become heavily ingrained in our government. That's what happened to their governments over there and we're lucky we didn't start that way, otherwise it'd be harder to shrug off.
point is, that is extremist religion coupled with government, not religion alone.
what we have now is moderate religion coupled with government IN SOME PLACES. if it were widespread and extreme as Cruz would have it, then we'd be the same.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)That's a ridiculous thing to say. No matter who is President, we still have a constitution. I also don't see anyone beheading people for leaving Christianity in the US or stoning adulterers (sometimes just women who are holding hands with their boyfriends). Just fucking STOP with the false equivalencies. All you're doing is minimizing all the very real bullshit women have to put up with every single day for being in a Muslim country. Just fucking stop.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)and ted doesn't have a pastor that encourages the killing of homosexuals endorsing him and speaking for him? hmmm
not minimizing anything. women were treated well over there before radical Islam took over. you know that right?
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)mouth. I didn't say they didn't exist. I said it doesn't fucking matter because we have ACTUAL LAWS AND A CONSTITUTION. So teddy has a crazy zealot preacher? SO FUCKING WHAT? He has zero power and he'll never have any power. Comparing some schmuck in Texas mouthing off to LAWS ON THE BOOKS that force women to cover from head to toe, punish women in marriages and those outside marriage for holding hands or showing their ankles is nothing but cultural relativist BULLSHIT. I have no idea why you're confirming that women were treated like shit under Islam long before isis became a thing. It's like you're making my point for me.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)and regarding laws and constitution... you see trump getting in trouble? no?
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)Perhaps to the 90s in Afghanistan with the taliban? They were simply wonderful for women. Or Saudi Arabia where women were NEVER allowed to drive and have covered themselves in shrouds for as long as I can remember? Your question about donald makes no sense whatsoever. Do let me know when we have laws ON THE BOOKS that will allow death for being gay, for leaving Christianity, for holding hands with my boyfriend - then you would have a point. Until then, just stop with the cultural relativism crap - it's dishonest, annoying and makes Democrats look like morons.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)Last edited Tue Mar 29, 2016, 12:42 PM - Edit history (1)
but like anyone else, if we don't pay attention, we too can fall victim to it. go to book of timothy for all the women serve men shit you can enjoy from the Christian religion.
I mentioned trump because you said, "BUT LAWS" so my reply is, laws don't apply to the powerful.
and here for your education as to why Islam has not always been totally oppressive of women...
www.examiner.com/article/history-s-famous-muslim-women-scholars-philanthropists-and-rulers
just, stop with the misunderstanding and hatred. it helps no one.
MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)so you are saying we should discriminate against muslims because there are some muslims that don't like Christians? this makes as much sense as your statement which completely minimizes the slaughter of innocent people at the hands of islamists.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)Where in my post did I say we should discriminate against anyone???
MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)the Ten Commandments clearly state 'Thou shalt not kill'. Anyone who becomes a good Christian must abide by these commandments and not kill under any circumstances. Do you know if Islam has any such commandments that the devout would follow and not kill?
It would be interesting to contrast teachings. And if are misunderstanding, surely a moderate muslim can help clarify something like Islam forbids killing of homosexuals, but we can't stop crazies who aren't listening.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)because the info is available... So I'll give you some factual bullet points to digest.
The bible and it's ten commandments aren't as cut and dry as you would think. History proves this because of the crusades, the Spanish inquisition, etc...
People have killed in the name of Christianity. Why? because there are passages in the bible that permit punishment by stoning to death and such. And the book of contradictions that it is, it tells us "thou shalt not judge" and yet, the majority of modern day Christianity believes it's their right to condemn people for not following the word all the time.
there was a pastor in new York who encouraged the stoning to death of homosexuals a year ago I believe.
I grew up baptist Christian, so I have an understanding of that. I won't claim to be a scholar on islam, but like Christianity, it condemns killing people as well with lines like, "Nor take life -- which Allah has made sacred -- except for just cause. And if anyone is slain wrongfully, we have given his heir authority (to demand retaliation or to forgive): but let him not exceed bounds in the matter of taking life, for he is helped (by the Law)." [Quran 17:33]"
guess who decides whether or not the killing is a just cause? not Allah. people do, bad people. guess who decides if a crazy Christian radical shoots up a church? not God. again, its bad people.
so, the Quran has its lines that forbid killing, and then lines that allow it. Same with the bible. it ALWAYS comes down to whom and how its being interpreted.
Sure, for people like you and I "thou shalt not kill" and an easy to follow list of commandments makes sense. But a lot of people read further than that or "read between the lines"
just remember... Islam has been around just as long as Christianity... and yet the idea that its a religion of TERROR is relatively recent. were people fearing Islam back in WW1? No? well, it was around. it was around before that too.
most religions are normally fine and dandy until an ill hearted human gets their hands on it.
MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)It's interesting to see such a lapse from someone purporting to teach me history.
my point is that the wording is clear in the ten commandments. is there a single similar page in Islam that can we reviewed and moderates can say that's true?
retrowire
(10,345 posts)no one is purporting anything lol.
anyways, calm down for a moment. I wasn't trying to lecture. my point is that no amount of clear wording in any holy book is going to prevent ill hearted men from bending it to their own will.
the ten commandments are not concrete to everyone.
The non violent parts of the bible and quran aren't concrete to everyone. Understand that first, then you'll get why this isn't so black and white.
and please, don't move goal posts. you went from asking if the Quran says anything against killing to asking if there's an entire page that denounces it. I gave you a verse and you have access to the same internet I do. go see for yourself.
also, 700 year difference? makes no difference. the point still stands, nobody was considering that religion one of terror until recent times. nobody had a problem with Islam then, because it wasn't an issue in its origins.
MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)countries.
I hear that if gays move to the moon and ted cruz become the governor, he would put them into airlocks. My let's not stop any gay people getting killed because of ted cruz on the moon
pnwmom
(109,025 posts)There are 30 million living under the repressive Saudi regime -- and that's only one of the countries where women and LGBT are deprived of human rights.
EX500rider
(10,891 posts)paleotn
(18,015 posts)I think not. What the vast majority of humans everywhere want, sans the state / religious propaganda and political bullshit, is to live in peace and hope there children accomplish more than they. Nothing more. Nothing less. It's people with an agenda of separation...of us verses them...power hungry bastards that are the problem. Given your rhetoric above, if that hits a little close to home, it's meant to. 
EX500rider
(10,891 posts)Not everybody wants the things you stated or we would have no ISIL or Boko Haram.
In fact large majorities of people in some muslim countries do in fact want the death sentence (usually by stoning) for apostasy and homosexuality and adultery. (apostasy is a crime in 23 out 49 Muslim majority countries)
paleotn
(18,015 posts)....oh, wait. Those are mostly religious / totalitarian regimes. My bad.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Those are not totalitarian regimes, yet over 70 percent support making Sharia Law the law of the land.
Turborama
(22,109 posts)2nd, bullshit.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)They also have a Muslim population of around 4 million. Among that population, 77 percent support making Sharia Law the law of the land in Muslim areas.
Turborama
(22,109 posts)...by most people's standards.
Again, Thailand is 93.20 % Buddhist.
I question their sampling of Indonesia, a country of over 18,000 islands, too.
*Referring specifically to their wish for Sharia to be the law of the land.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)It seems that there are high percentages of Muslims around the world in a variety of different countries who lean towards some of the more hardline rather than moderate views on these matters.
That does not seem to correlate exclusively with countries that are Islamic theocracies.
Some of the highest percentages of Muslims who support implementation of Sharia Law live in countries where Muslims are the minority, as indicated by the graphic I posted.
katsy
(4,246 posts)They aren't helpless infants. They have a responsibility to reject and denounce sharia law.
Why is that not happening. If a billion moderate, good Muslim peoples reject sharia, they will crush the few bad apples, right?
So why is this not a thing?
GummyBearz
(2,931 posts)I will wait for an answer that does not involve deflection or a logical fallacy, but I am not holding my breath on it
katsy
(4,246 posts)you passing out.
A billion moderate Muslims can absolutely crush these mentally unstable, sharia wielding, criminals.
Easy. IF they didn't actually support sharia that is.
IF they support sharia law, their values are in direct conflict with our definition of human rights, secular laws.
hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)EX500rider
(10,891 posts)Turborama
(22,109 posts)In fact, they can often be wrong.
EX500rider
(10,891 posts)Is apostasy is being a crime in 23 Muslim majority countries also wrong?
Turborama
(22,109 posts)EX500rider
(10,891 posts)
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)It's an eye-opener.
MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)For what it's worth...
MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)the Ten Commandments clearly state 'Thou shalt not kill'. Anyone who becomes a good Christian must abide by these commandments and not kill under any circumstances. Do you know if Islam has any such commandments that the devout would follow and not kill?
It would be interesting to contrast teachings. And if are misunderstanding, surely a moderate muslim can help clarify something like Islam forbids killing of homosexuals, but we can't stop crazies who aren't listening.
MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)murder of homosexuals and anyone who criticizes the religion or leaves it), and the fact that almost every majority muslim country in the world supports the death penalty and subjugates (how are the Christians treated in Pakistan) its minorities, hatred of Israel I think the sooner we acknowledge reality the more lives will be saved.
I'm not sure why bringing up facts is racist yet muslims will not accept homosexuality, female rights, the ability to freely convert to another religion.
If what you say is true:
- is homosexuality acceptable
- is it acceptable to marry someone in a different religion without forcing them to convert
- should stoning people to death be allowed for anything, let alone for adultery or blasphemy
- is it acceptable for a muslim to convert to a different religion
- are women free not to wear the hijab
let's see if someone will actually answer each of these questions? if there is no answer, then statements of moderation are empty.
MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)other minds at ease, it's not a good thing.
the fact that no one on this board who has the energy to keep typing 'it's only a few' and 'religion of peace' and then hide comments and call concerned and stunned (at the constant horrible bombings) people bigots reveals that the comments above are true or partially true. if someone said to me your religion promotes killing, I would say absolutely not, and here's why.
The fact that people can't even be bothered to actually explain the supposed good things in the religion or want you to be so frightened as not to even ask means there is a lack of moderation.
I have posted on these topics and I get lots of responses calling me names and bigoted, and hidden posts.
I get no one saying - no - you are wrong. Moderate muslims accept ...... all the stuff above and do not accept killing other people under any circumstances.
I don't know how long it will take people to understand what islam is really about - and it's not peace. the fact that no one can be 'bothered' to support the notion that killing and bigotry against gay people is NOT acceptable Islam shows the radicalization.
Why am I expected to be moderate with followers of a religion who are bigoted against gay people?
alp227
(32,078 posts)Those who go beyond reasoned criticism of the religion and will demand the outright exclusion of Muslims from western society will find common ground with "reasonable" people like Blair.
That's the problem with otherwise reasonable positions like opposing illegal immigration or criticizing Islam. Radical eliminationist bigots have taken over those positions.
GummyBearz
(2,931 posts)Sorry, but there isn't a problem with reasonable positions. Unless you are unreasonable.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,180 posts)But we can't be played for suckers or put in a box. Blair, who I despise, can still be right about some things once in a blue moon.
The combination of past decades, centuries, of Western colonization, followed by multiple interventions politically and militarily, treating them like third world peoples, demonizing their culture in Hollywood and elsewear, together with the fact that most peoples under duress turn to religion even more, has resulted in an almost Inquisition type dominance in the vast majority of Muslims whether here or abroad. The new immigrants to not suddenly disbelieve all the anti-western, anti-liberal society propaganda they have been brainwashed with their entire lives.
If a Christian evangelical fundamentalist family (a family of which I grew up in so I know) moved or immigrated to some other country, like Sweden, where this kind of fundamentalism hardly exists, this family's head, who would be the husband, would not simply start going to some United Church or other more liberal congregation that does not share his "values". He would find the small, basement meeting evangelical community and worship with them. The idea that an indoctrinated Muslim family coming from countries with such radical (to us) anti LGBT, anti women's rights, where the majorities favor the death penalty for apostates, have just thrown off those ingrained beliefs once they cross our borders is naive, and frankly dangerous thinking.
Igel
(35,390 posts)India in the 1400s and 1500s, when there was no Western Imperialism or demonization rampant and available to commoners in Muslim-dominated territory.
Spain in the 1200s when Spain wasn't exactly driving Islam into the sea
Egypt and Syria off and on from 1000 to 1500, when Islam was at its height
Syria in the mid-1800s, when Xians were massacred because Russia dared defend the Ottoman forces.
It led to raids in S. Russia in the 110s and 1200s, up the west coast of Europe in the 1500s and 1600s.
The oppression of Serbs under the Ottomans in the 1600s and 1700s and 1800s. Oh, and the Bulgarians, too.
Strictly speaking, the Armenian and Greek genocides were done as much out of Muslim as Turkish nationalism, even though the Turks showed up in the late 1200s AD and the Greeks were already well established there by 500 BC.
The Salafis are throwbacks to these times and draw their inspiration from the same texts in the Qur'aan and Hadith that were quoted in the 1000s and 1200s and 1400s. During which time I don't think the Europeans were all that much of a threat to Islam. Even though Andalusia, the roll-back of Muslim imperialism in the Iberian Peninsula, was a great humiliation.
What you see is all there is. Not.
raging moderate
(4,318 posts)I attended such a church during my teens, and I have been in contact with many since then. If they do attend a church that quotes the liberal Bible passages and does not promote extreme right-wing thinking, they soon leave because they feel their family needs a more "Bible-based" church.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)A friend teaches a Catholic University. She tells me that many of her students are Saudi, which seems bizarre, at first, but says that they are more comfortable in a conservative religious environment, even if it is a different religion, than they would be in a typical American university.
Angel Martin
(942 posts)like opposing illegal immigration or criticizing Islam."
DU would have to concede that some of the conservative critiques of PC thinking are correct, and we can never agree to that !
the official bird of DU
GOLGO 13
(1,681 posts)
TexasMommaWithAHat
(3,212 posts)Any Muslim (of which there are millions) who supports Sharia law is "fundamentally incompatible with the modern world."
That's right - any Muslim who holds fundamentally backwards beliefs regarding apostates, gays, women's rights, etc., is "fundamentally incompatible with the modern world."
And, no, I didn't type "all" Muslims.
Zira
(1,054 posts)And Freepers in general.
TexasMommaWithAHat
(3,212 posts)It's a sad time in our country when someone like Donald Trump is a "serious" candidate for president, but I would imagine he has done very little to put gays in harms way, stop women from driving, or has called for the murder of apostates, etc.
Zira
(1,054 posts)right? I'm talking the tea partiers who are joining white supremacists movements and starting new ones, in droves right now.
TexasMommaWithAHat
(3,212 posts)beliefs of millions of Muslims, we give the crazies more power?
When you deny what is so obvious, do you really think the crazies in this country say "Oh, I must be wrong about those crazy Muslims?" No, you empower them when they point out how ridiculous we are to deny what's going on with millions of Muslims.
Zira
(1,054 posts)isn't the belief of most Muslims and RACISTS will run with this.
I think I've been quite clear. And I think I'm not giving the answers you would like to run with.
We all know there are extremely radicalized muslims who do this crap. Want to look closer at the countries who do it and see when their democratically elected government was toppled and they went that way?
Start with Iran. Lovely education there.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)Millions is still a big problem.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)Is it true? I have no clue. Is it possible? I could believe that.
Zira
(1,054 posts)You're intent is just way too painfully obvious and I'm not willing to declare all Muslims haters or Islam inherently bad.
TexasMommaWithAHat
(3,212 posts)Continue on with your head in the sand.
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)is very similar to what ISIS wants for everybody.
EX500rider
(10,891 posts)Can you point to that somewhere in their platform?
Democat
(11,617 posts)Comments like yours make all Democrats look stupid.
You are flying a rainbow flag, which you could likely be killed for in many countries which you are defending.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)Put me on ignore too then.
Zira
(1,054 posts)I think we are all aware that there is a deadly Islamic right and that it gets worse the more drones we unleash and the more we support Israel when it goes on bombing campaigns of Palestine. I think we are also aware that some countries are not progressed in women's rights.
But, not accepting the modern world's role in this is absurd. I don't want to just bash repressed and poor people because they aren't progressed in civil rights. Most of these individuals will never kill anyone and consider killing wrong. The same violence and racism will come to America if we let the fascist right rule and look how close they are. Iran would not be the country it is today if the US didn't topple their democratically elected president in 1953, or had more political events not happened(the fall of the shah) after which women had to go back to covering their heads. Right before that the Olympics were held in Iran. Now many progressives there are fighting an extreme right group that wants to keep sharia law but they have finally gotten back to Democratically elected presidents. We just watched Egypt nearly go backwards. Don't forget that Mubarak may have been elected but then he started arresting and killing journalists and protestors, and he started imposing religious law - outlawed shorts, outlawed music. That country saw where that was going. They didn't throw away their Arab Spring to get rid of him for nothing.
The person I was arguing with had no interesting in reasons, just in calling the problem Islamic. It's not an Islamic problem and if you look at the Koran teaching sites, most of them are about peace. People don't suicide bomb because of Islam. The current attacks in Brussels are the result of foreign policy that has politicized people against us, not Islam.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)And the hatred and violence we see today are almost entirely our doing, and the old Soviet Union for invading Afghanistan in the first place. So I do agree with you, I was just cipherin' the numbers. 
pnwmom
(109,025 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)not make it true.
840high
(17,196 posts)TexasMommaWithAHat
(3,212 posts)No compromise on women's rights. None.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)The moral relativists are working my last nerve and are far too willing to throw women under the bus in the name of pc nonsense.
katsy
(4,246 posts)No compromise on women's rights
No compromise on freedom of belief/no belief
No compromise on LGBTQ rights whatsoever
No theocracies or theocratic laws apply in modern western cultures
If the above human rights are unacceptable to fundie islamists, they can enjoy their nutfuckery within their own borders. No one can make them accept secular laws. Likewise, they have no right to impose their beliefs on western culture.
cprise
(8,445 posts)And I'll say that imperialism is another human rights issue.
TexasMommaWithAHat
(3,212 posts)to leave the house?
In which Christian country do women have to cover from head to toe?
In which Christian country does stoning occur...albeit not very frequently?
In which Christian country do thieves have their hands cut off?
In which Christian country do honor killings occur?
And which Christian country has the equivalent of sharia law? Or which Christian country has a sizable minority population calling for sharia law?
I HATE FUNDAMENTALISM OF ALL TYPES, but there's just no comparison between the two religions in 2016.
katsy
(4,246 posts)cprise
(8,445 posts)and you'll find Christian fundamentalists are over-represented. Do they complain about Saudi being the beheading capital of the world?
But you did miss the point about Dominionism, which is similar to calling for Sharia law. And the so-called "religious freedom" laws -- which are meant to exempt only Christians from obeying the law so they can follow their own laws -- are gaining support here.
And I think your laundry list of barbarisms misses the point of anti-war dissent entirely. You don't see shock-and-awe-mongering as barbaric.
You also seem to forget the west...
* redefined most of the borders in the ME and installed brutal puppet regimes.
* toppled democratic governments in countries that were modernizing.
* favored Sunnis to do the west's dirty work in pursuit of oil... that means we armed and financed the worst examples of what you cite, people who seek worldwide domination and who have a calling to create international strife.
* created and props-up Israel which keeps a portion of the Muslim population as stateless inmates in a vast open-air prison, where generations of them live, grow old and die.
You think all this imposition of political power and death from another part of the globe hasn't vastly increased the appeal of fundamentalist rage and stupidity over there? You expect them to keep reaching for western political norms forever? Maybe they should aspire to the gentility of global pushbutton carnage and cultivate a complete ignorance of the scale of civilian casualties... it only takes about 820 military bases to reach that bliss.
Even Colin Powell said about Iraq: "You break it, you own it."
Indeed.
That's what our history as a self-described "hyperpower" means in relation to so many nations. The new US slogan repeated in DC is "Making America the indispensable country." -- really. A cheerful euphemism for making sure no other country can function without us. We have so taken over the third world weapons market that no armed third world conflict can ensue without us.
The only thing Tony Blair's quote proves is that he prefers savagery in a modern flavor. We have plenty of it here, as courts shove a staggering 20% of the adult population through the prisons while the badge-wearers condone a culture of prison rape. And why?? Justice is also considered "zero tolerance" and death penalties un-overturnable for innocent black men, the mode of death being chemical immobilization and excruciating pain -- minus stones. US cluster bombs and depleted uranium litter foreign lands (removes hands, limbs, face, maybe all at once).
katsy
(4,246 posts)Xtian fundies Islamist fundies... All the same to this athiest. They'd see me dead as an athiest, chattel as a woman.
paleotn
(18,015 posts)....read Leviticus lately.
FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)Including President Obama, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the Charleston massacre victims?
C'mon...toss out the sarcasm thingie here!
paleotn
(18,015 posts)
My point is, I can use Leviticus and a bunch of loony fundigelicals to make the same logical argument about most if not all Christians that's being made by some here about most if not all Muslims. The broad brush swings both ways, ya know.
TexasMommaWithAHat
(3,212 posts)I live in Texas where there's a fundamentalist church on every corner, and I don't know anyone who believes that all that OT stuff should be followed (with the exception of the 10 commandments).
Even if the fundies took complete control, I'm pretty sure I'm safe from being judged an apostate worthy of death. 
cprise
(8,445 posts)Its a reaction to Wikipedia which undertook a de-liberalization of knowledge. They consider Wiki to be only the tip of the iceberg, because the 'evil' of liberalization took root in..... the King James Bible.
Dominionism is medievalism, which IS a mindset that can kill apostates. So don't be so pretty-sure about your safety when they are successfully promoting "shoot as soon as you perceive a threat" laws and even "religious freedom" laws that exempt themselves from secular law.
GummyBearz
(2,931 posts)When the book that tells you to kill non-believers is treated as the holy and literal word of god (like the koran is taught and treated), it creates problems. Christians treat the bible as a collection of stories, written by men, and men are flawed. They acknowledge the flaws in it, and have moved beyond calling for stoning people in the past few hundred years. Hopefully muslims will catch up sooner than later
metalbot
(1,058 posts)I definitely don't think you can make a blanket statement that Christians don't take the bible literally.
There are clearly millions of people in the US who believe that the earth is approximately 6,000 years old, who believe that a flood covered the entire earth, and that languages were a product of the tower of Babel. I know people who insist that the bible is the inerrant word of God, and that it was merely transcribed by man, not written.
That being said, most of those same Christians are very selective when it comes to parts of the Hebrew bible.
GummyBearz
(2,931 posts)Please tell me when the last time the Vatican sentenced someone to be stoned or had a thief's hand cut off.
On the other hand, it wouldn't be too hard to find an example of such things in SA, Iran, etc.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,180 posts)I grew up in such a fundamentalist household.
But one thing different about Christianity and Islam is that there is no Jesus equivalent in Islam. There is no "son of Mohammad" that comes later and says basically, ..pay no heed to that old book you called the Old Testament, I'm bringing the new laws for you, and those laws are all about love. About doing unto others as you'd want done to yourself. About loving your enemies. About doing good to those that despise you. About turning the other cheek.
Then the Old Testament became a book of stories, and whenever there was a passage on say the Israelite's massacring whole towns and all the women and children too, like Jericho, Christian scholars could always have a New Testament asterisk on every story like that. So they have the best of both worlds. They can use the Old Testament as stories of the power of God the Father and that one must fear him or you'll go to hell. But they have the out in that Jesus came along later and said....I (or We the trinity) changed our minds, and now we are going to be less aggressive and live by example believing that its the meek that will inherit the Earth.
Of course tell that to the new American Prosperity right wing military-stroking Christian church. I always am astounded at how far from Jesus's actual teachings about turning your cheek, loving your enemies, feeding the poor etc..the American Christian Church has drifted from and yet they still fervently call themselves "Christ-ian", using the name of the supposed Messiah that told them all that Old Testament stuff was BS.
And that is the point. This new American church proves that it only takes a number of leaders, over time, to indoctrinate their flocks into believing their own religion says something different than what it was intended to say. Islam, like all religions, can be used over time, by more aggressive violent leaders to shift the purpose and meanings of the Koran. But even more so with the Koran in that there is no "New Koran" that came later telling them that Mohammad loves the Gentiles as much as his own chosen peoples.
cprise
(8,445 posts)By the second Bush Administration, the Republican Party was an entire political infrastructure premised on fantasies. Those who carefully indulged and protected those fantasies were rewarded. Figures who foolishly pointed out the fantasies were derided, punished, and pressed into political exile.
http://blog.chron.com/goplifer/2016/03/the-revenge-of-the-reality-based-community/
On Christian Dominionism:
http://www.yuricareport.com/Dominionism/DirectoryRiseOfDominionismInAmerica.html
karynnj
(59,511 posts)and then allowing the most fundamentalist clerics to define the values of the religion which are then encoded into law.
In the US, I have heard both Republicans and Democrats, including some of the ones I like most, speak of their religion as informing their position on various bills. Democrats refer to how their religious values mean that they have to fight for the poor, the hungry, the homeless and those without health insurance or on what is a just war. Here, the values of the legislators, whether from their religious tradition of not, drive the bills they write. Where this differs from a state outsourcing the writing of its laws to a religious entity is that these same Democrats uniformly support that state and federal laws are written by the legislators and they, not religious law, are the laws of the land. (To change a law, the change needs to be Constitutional and have the needed support in the legislature and executive branch.)
Where I see the line where things are not reasonable is where any religious group wants state or federal law in the United States to be changed to be their religious law. Our law is not "what the Bible says" or what (Jewish) halaka says or Sharia law.
However, I have no more problem with a Muslim who says that he PERSONALLY abides by Sharia law, than I do with an observant Jew who abides by halaka or a Christian who says they live by the word of Christ ...... as long as they are not breaking the laws of the country.
In majority Muslim countries, we could push for them to not allow the clerics to define the laws. However, even if the writing of the laws was the province of the legislators, it would be surprising if Muslim values did not inform their legislators as Christian and Jewish values inform many of ours. Even if they were strong democracies - which they aren't, laws reflect the values of the people. Pushing them to add provisions to their law that protect minorities might be the only way to moderate the resultant laws.
While I agree with you on women's rights and LGBT rights, I think that while we can advocate for them, I do not think we can reject every country that is at a different level on these than we were. We need to differentiate between countries that do not share our values and countries or entities that are promoting terrorism. The existential problem is terrorism - and to make the level of that lower, we need to work mostly with the countries that we know do not share our values.
Calista241
(5,586 posts)Despite the fact that we may think / hope otherwise. There are many millions of enlightened Muslims that will let me and mine live in peace believing whatever i want to believe, but it seems there will always be some minority that believes in this strain of abhorrent extremism.
The articles on the devastation at the Museum of Palmyra came out today, and it just made me so sad to see history destroyed like that.
MowCowWhoHow III
(2,103 posts)Zira
(1,054 posts)over torture and killing peoples families if they are innocent and have a family member in Isis.
The Muslims I know are peaceful and say these radical Muslims are going against what they were taught.
Christians have no shortage of people who would kill others that don't think like them. Our laws have forced them out of keeping slaves and beating them to death as well as beating their wives and children to death. I became a Democrat because in the 1980's I was a child watching TV and every night the Republicans argued in congress that a man shouldn't be arrested for beating his wife. There was a new law making that illegal and the republicans fought it for weeks.
paleotn
(18,015 posts)...these 25K speak for all of them?
MowCowWhoHow III
(2,103 posts)Insert moronic-smiley.
pnwmom
(109,025 posts)without a "guardian"; that they must wear face veils and cover everything but their hands; and that women may have no legal authority over their own lives -- any fundie or govt with those positions has views incompatible with the modern world.
So are all the governments that still make being LGBT a criminal offense.
And unfortunately there are millions of them in different countries around the world.
TexasMommaWithAHat
(3,212 posts)I think steam comes out of my ears every time I read someone downplaying the millions and millions of Muslims who support the subjugation of women.
840high
(17,196 posts)Mary Mac
(323 posts)Every time. I do not wish to live in a repressive medieval culture.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts) 
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Pretty messed up planet and minds, alp227.
Turborama
(22,109 posts)Seems like he's trying to divert attention from the fact that if he and his faux cowboy buddy hadn't invaded Iraq IS wouldn't even exist.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)-- Ron Suskind in Faith, "Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush." The New York Times Magazine, Oct. 17, 2004.
And we are left to live in the nightmare world of their making, getting poorer in purse, let alone political power, during these, the richest times in human history (and when money trumps peace and democracy).
suffragette
(12,232 posts)Supposedly about anti-terrorism.
And they plan to release the report around the time of the Democratic and Republican Conventions.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027633168
Pretty specific timing, right?
Looks like Blair's putting out some bits of info early.
Denzil_DC
(7,290 posts)which is unlikely to flatter Blair.
It's been delayed to an embarrassing extent, but the latest estimate I've found was that it might be released in June: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/feb/15/chilcot-inquiry-lord-scott-arms-to-iraq-report-comparison
However, that was before the date of the UK European Referendum was set (June 23), so it's likely it'll be postponed again.
suffragette
(12,232 posts)Policy in that area and the release date looks to be done with intention.
Thanks for the info about Chilcot likely being delayed again. Sad they keep pushing the date off.
Given that Blair and Panetta are both tight with Clinton and that Blair and she have continued to work on Middle East policy through the years, he as so called Peace Envoy and she in the Quartet, I wonder if there's some coordination of policy going on.
Denzil_DC
(7,290 posts)I doubt any release date has much to do with the US election - pressure's been building and patience running low for a long time now, but who knows? At the moment I just hope I live to see it published!
As for links with Blair, I think anybody, not just politicians, would do well to keep him at more than arm's length - he's an utter liability at this stage, and blatantly milking his position for all the cash he can make, slow to accept that any credibility he may once have had (never, ever any at all with me, BTW) is long blown.
The ructions when the (absolutely vast) report is released will be epic. Funnily enough, Corbyn will no doubt be proven to have been on the right side of history on that one ...
suffragette
(12,232 posts)Sorry that I wasn't clear about that. I was jumping between discussion of the two upcoming reports.
Agree with all you say about Blair. Still he hasn't actually gone away (I wish he would) and has continued to have a seat at the table while he rakes in the cash helping out various corrupt regimes. That's why his collaboration with Leon Panetta caught my eye. Something is stirring there, funded by who knows who and the timing is suspect.
As for the Chilcot report, when do you think it might be released?
Also, tell me more about Corbyn being proven right on this. I don't know as much about him as I would like.
Denzil_DC
(7,290 posts)Chilcot? I'd imagine after the EU Referendum, but I've no insider knowledge.
The Referendum's on June 23, and Parliament goes into summer recess from July 21 to September 5 this year. Maybe it'll squeak out before the silly season starts, maybe it'll be held over till the next session. I doubt very much it'll be released while Parliament's not sitting.
As for Corbyn, his Wikipedia entry's a good place to start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Corbyn
He was a very vocal rebel in Labour ranks when they were being strongarmed into supporting the UK's participation in the Iraq War. He planned to apologize for Labour's role in it at last year's party conference - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-to-apologise-for-iraq-war-on-behalf-of-the-labour-party-10517364.html - but for one reason or another, that didn't happen. He's reported to have postponed it till Chilcot comes out: http://news.sky.com/story/1578538/no-corbyn-apology-on-iraq-until-chilcot-report
suffragette
(12,232 posts)I've noticed that Blair seems to be blasting out linked criticism of Sanders and Corbyn recently. He really seems bothered by the move away from Third Way, New Labour and New Democrat policies and support.
And he wants to keep power as well as padding his pockets.
To me, and I'm sure many others, his criticism has the opposite effect. If he is so worried about them, then they are on the right track.
Denzil_DC
(7,290 posts)There's still a strong Blairite faction in the Labour Party (I'm in Scotland, BTW, and unlikely ever to vote Labour again, at least as long as I live here). That's one of the things that's going to make the Chilcot Report release messy and interesting. Neither Sanders nor Corbyn are messiahs, but they're certainly a refreshing change from the neocon/neolib post-Thatcherite/Reaganite concensus. And I'd stand their judgment up against their adversaries' on a range of issues any day.
jpak
(41,761 posts)not that he could...
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)millions of Christians.
C Moon
(12,226 posts)
polly7
(20,582 posts)Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)
randr
(12,418 posts)that has allowed the continuation of 5th century mentality to creep into the modern world. While we have made such a big deal not to trade or work with "communistic" countries such as Cuba and other Central and South American nations to the detriment of millions of people we have turned a blind eye to the sufferings of the millions of Islamic people living in countries ruled by religious monsters. In these countries we at least had the chance to demand some human rights changes due to the nature of economic codependency.
We have a lot of splanin and atonin in front of us if we think we can work our way out of a possible world holocaust where we are the bad guy on the planet. I am afraid people, like Mr. Maher' will use this tidbit to strengthen their argument that "Islam" is the boogie man in the room. Regardless of how many people subscribe or are victims of the religious madness spreading across the globe we need at this juncture to identify with and support those peoples who can see the values of human rights and liberties no matter the numbers.
polly7
(20,582 posts)We prop up the worst dictators - until they become too powerful, then they're cut down. Any secular 'dictator'/leader that is honestly using their own resources to help their own people - we cut them down using radical religious freaks that take any progress made back decades/centuries. Over and over and over. The millions of people are our pawns in a disgusting horrible game - we use and abuse them; women's rights fought for and gotten - gone. The right to education in nations we need resources from - gone. We unleash our monsters upon them and then accuse them of being 'unsuitable' for the modern world - when it's we who've turned back progress they've died for - over and over and fucking over. What would the ME and Africa look like without our 'meddling'/atrocities? We've seen the pictures here of Afghanistan women dressed in modern clothing going out and about studying, working - the same with Iraq, Libya - now where are they? Not 'modern' enough. We're a sick culture. We have no room to criticize millions while at the same time destroying every chance they have to live in peace and work for their own futures and progress.
randr
(12,418 posts)people across the globe exercise are a result of not just our but the whole western worlds influence.
We have made progress but not enough and it has been the greed of a small number of us that has failed.
pampango
(24,692 posts)Note he did not say 'tens of millions'. Anything less than 15 million would be less than 1% but Blair does get credit for scaring people.
paleotn
(18,015 posts)And that goes for all the rest of the Islamophobes on this thread. What's your solution? More wars? Nuke them from orbit...it's the only way to be sure? It's just that arm chair, shit head thinking that's gotten us into this mess in Syria. Lets stop with the same old, simplistic thinking that's at its root. It's pretty fucking obvious it doesn't work, that is unless perpetual warfare is your game. To stop broad brushing 1.6 BILLION people is a damn good start. Then maybe they will learn from us and won't feel they need to hold on to the old, 12th century thinking most of us in the West chucked long ago. That we are actually not the enemy their handlers say we are. Otherwise, we look just like self centered assholes they've been told we are, who just want to bomb them into submission and feed directly into the propaganda narrative they've been force fed all their lives.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)A few million out of 1.5 billion? That's about 1/10 of a percent. If you think that's outlandish you should open your eyes.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)Last edited Mon Mar 28, 2016, 10:38 PM - Edit history (1)
Surely 10s of millions and probably hundreds.
Folks who, if dropped in western society, would fail to integrate and would become a burden or a liability.
How is this even a question?
Denial is an amazing thing.
alp227
(32,078 posts)TipTok
(2,474 posts)It is vitally important to identify and welcome the ones who can make the transition.
Strong borders, solid vetting and almost zero tolerance for violations will allow those who can integrate to join society.
The added benefit is that some of these folks, or their children, go back to their original nations and help to undermine the lunacy that goes on there.
Shining a light on and bringing new information into these backwards cultures is the only way to stamp out the regressive parts.
Turborama
(22,109 posts)And this presumption about "integration" and "burden" reeks of racism.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)Better?
I say backward in the same sense I would consider someone from Europe who took a direct trip from the middle ages to modern times. Or a lily white 'Merican named Bubba from today who has regressive beliefs and acts upon them regarding women, race or anythng else.
It has nothing to do with race and everything to do with belief and actions.
They would hold certain beliefs that are incompatible with society and would have to change them in order to properly acclimate.
It is not unreasonable to expect people coming into civilized culture to integrate and if they don't they should expect to be viewed as a burden.
Turborama
(22,109 posts)You're using them reciprocally but a lot of the time they are mutually exclusive, unless you think of humans as being like the borg.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)Last edited Wed Mar 30, 2016, 11:42 AM - Edit history (1)
Integrate means taking an active part in society and meeting a minimum level of acceptable behavior.
Burden is what they become when that doesn't happen and liability is when they go a step beyond that to actually becoming a threat to that society.
choie
(4,112 posts)Shut the hell up!
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)I could say to Tony Blair (joke that he is), that the same thing holds true for Christians.
Both are based on ancient mythology that have no base in fact. neither should have any bearing in modern policy.
fbc
(1,668 posts)You can't bomb people into more modern liberal thinking. Persecution will have the opposite result.
romanic
(2,841 posts)Its true that a minority of them would fail and rebel in a modern society where women and gays and people of other faiths have rights.
But consider that a minority of that billion+ equals to several millions. Several million jihadis that would not hesitate to behead you even if you showed compassion and tolerance. Mr. Blair is not wrong there and that is a huge problem.
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)Many millions of people period hold viewpoints that are fundamentally incompatible with the modern world. This assertion could be made about many, many different groups - and be somewhat accurate. As for that being solid reasoning for why we should march to war...? Not so much.
What Blair and those like him are promoting with this kind of rhetoric is the notion that Muslims are dangerous. I don't find that to be true. Some Muslims are dangerous, insane, extreme... sure - just like some Christians - and it could easily number in "many millions" for either group.
I agree with Blair on one thing - ISIS does have to be crushed. I don't think though, that it will be crushed through demonizing Muslims or misunderstanding several key concepts. Not all of those "many millions" are out there committing violence, ready to kill themselves or others for the sake of their religion. Many of them live fairly normal lives. They may believe some fantastical things about their religion, about right and wrong... about dogma and doctrine, but a lot of those hard core beliefs are never put into practice.
Facing many millions of extremists is a very different thing than facing tens of thousands. Also... I do not think the best response is for us to put boots on the ground.
Diplomatic and humanitarian efforts from the west is the way forward here. We've got a lot of people suffering crushing poverty, hunger, oppression... people who have little or nothing, who just want to have reasonably good lives. We should focus our efforts there - on feeding people, on helping them get access to clean water, to healthcare, to vaccinations and medications. There's a wide variety of ways to help turn the tide... and that IS what will turn the tide. Not ignorant, broad brush statements or even boots on the ground... but demonstrating to the Muslim people of the world that we aren't assholes. That we care, that we are willing to share and engage with each other and coexist in peace and even friendship.
Sadly... some western Nations cannot even supply desperately needed things for their own people, in spite of an absolutely ridiculous, incredibly huge collection and stockpile of cash and resources. We give tax breaks (and relief) to billionaires, build trillion dollar fighter jets that don't work - we "misplace" billions of dollars all the time. Hell, we can't even seem to get any serious effort going to fix our infrastructure, even though it's falling apart.
Many millions of people are too busy bitching about welfare to even think about any notion of humanitarian aid for the rest of the world - they don't like what little we do to help people here!
So... Mr. Blair, there are indeed many millions of people, all over the world, with viewpoints that are fundamentally incompatible with the modern world - or at least with any concept of justice, compassion, peace, or prosperity. There were many millions who supported the push for "regime change", or, "operation Iraqi freedom". There were many millions who believed there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. There were many millions who enabled, encouraged... and actively worked to make things as vicious as they are at present... and you, Sir, are one of them.
So, forgive me if this many millions thing just doesn't do it for me. Muslims are people, like any other people, you have some individuals who are bad and some who are good. You have some groups that are batshit crazy and want to kill people and some that want to make the world a better place.
If there is growing hate for the west and growing appeal to groups that want to destroy it - you have yourself, your cronies, and your old friends to thank for that. You all created ISIS - and those of us who had a clue warned you many, many times.
Democat
(11,617 posts)Do those countries have millions of people who agree?
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)not just culture shock, the information and its method of delivery overwhelms a lot of people.
Darb
(2,807 posts)What nerve.
Elmergantry
(884 posts)Just look at Iran. Don't they hang homosexuals?
treestar
(82,383 posts)There are primitive non-Muslim cultures in the world today.
How does he have authority to tell us what "many millions" of Muslims think?
Turborama
(22,109 posts)Here's the correct unabridged version:
Many millions of Muslims 'fundamentally incompatible with the modern world', said the voices in Tony Blair's head when he conspired to illegally invade Iraq and remorselessly kill over a million civilians there.
Turborama
(22,109 posts)It's very sad to see it happen so consistently with such such stubborn hatred.
katsy
(4,246 posts)Which lies?
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)enlighten the rest of us stooges about the glories for women living in Muslim countries. Tell us how we're wrong and the death penalty doesn't really exist for being gay, for leaving Islam, for "dishonoring" your father. Tell us they don't really cut off the hands of thieves. That women - ALL women - can walk around in whatever clothing they wish, they can get an education, work for a living, live alone without fear. Just what lies are you referring to because I haven't seen ANY lies in this thread. NONE.
bdwker
(435 posts)pampango
(24,692 posts)A lot of that going around, Tony.
cprise
(8,445 posts)And they look and talk 'normal' so if we're like Tony Blair we won't give them a second thought.
MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)PaulaFarrell
(1,236 posts)ladjf
(17,320 posts)
0rganism
(23,994 posts)from the point of view of people who believe "the modern world" equates to liberalized social policies with enfranchisement for sexual and religious minorities, women's rights, democratic elections and unfettered free speech, there may well be a contingent of reactionary Muslims fundamentally incompatible with it.
perhaps that's because "the modern world" they're accustomed to equates to strict enforcement of social norms, corporal and capital punishment for dissenters and apostates, subjugation of women, and rule by monarchs or tin-pot dictators who use the tenets of Islam to solidify their hold on power. i doubt most of us would be compatible with their version of "the modern world".
despite all this there are many things we have in common. explosives, for instance. being "fundamentally incompatible with the modern world" has not prevented reactionary Muslims from becoming as proficient in their use as the rest of "the modern world". or telecommunications, another fixture of modernity. reactionary Muslims have shown that they are quite capable of adapting to use of telecom for instantaneous global communications; the fact that they say things with which many of us would disagree in no way reduces their overall "compatibility" with such systems.
with which versions of "the modern world" are you compatible?
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Philly-Union-Man
(79 posts)Poll after poll in the Muslim countries bears this out.
You don't have to like it but it is true. There is a serious problem within the culture itself.
GOLGO 13
(1,681 posts)Their fundies are 10X worse than Xtian fundies. They actually have no problem with physically carrying out their hatred. Our fundies mostly talk, whine & threaten but they just want someone else to enforce their hatred.
It's gonna take a couple of generations of being in the West for their kids to assimilate properly.
