Understanding the Revolutions in the Middle East

Yeah! No true Scotsman would ever be a suicide bomber!

There's no evidence that Islamic terrorists are psychopaths. And why would I want to get you to argue in favor of terrorists? :?

There are certain requirements to call something Islamic or to call something lets say, socialist. There are also certain requirement to call someone a Scotsman.

Yes, and I think it's absurd to say that Islamic extremists aren't actually Islamic.

It depends on how you interpret Islam, to a moderate Muslim, they are not Islamic.

Becuase tebetin budhists are not fighting a war against a counttry like people in Afghanistan are. Theres a difference between what is happening in Tibet than what is happening in places like Afghanistan. It just so happens that the population believes in Islam

It depends on how you interpret Islam, to a moderate Muslim, they are not Islamic.[/quote:2biuhy17]Exactly. To a moderate Muslim, no true Muslim would ever be a suicide bomber. That's bascially what Ahmed just said.

It depends on how you interpret Islam, to a moderate Muslim, they are not Islamic.[/quote:3vl2bt28]Exactly. To a moderate Muslim, no true Muslim would ever be a suicide bomber. That's bascially what Ahmed just said.[/quote]

most muslims are moderate muslims. Like Ahmed said, extremists make up only a small part of the muslim population

No, that's not at all true. The vast majority of Muslims are fundimentalists. Which is a group I consider somewhere between radical extremists and moderates in regards to their level of religious infatuation.

It depends, from the muslims that I know in my own generation they are all a really chilled out normal group of people. If you are referring to places like Pakistan where women are treated poorly and all the other bad press normally associated with them then I agree.

Well the majority of Muslims who live in Western countries usually end up moderate for various reasons. So you can't really judge based on that.

I agree, but that is not to say that muslims in the Middle East can not westernise. Perhaps these revolutions will usher in some kind of "renaissance" across the region though I doubt it to be honest.

I agree, but that is not to say that muslims in the Middle East can not westernise. Perhaps these revolutions will usher in some kind of "renaissance" across the region though I doubt it to be honest.[/quote:3c6juddq]Yes, that's exactly what I'm hoping will happen.

But you can judge based on the extremist group you've never met.

What? I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Are you denying that the majority of Muslims are fundamentalists?

"The use of this term is established and must be accepted, but it remains unfortunate and can be misleading. "Fundamentalist" is a Christian term. It seems to have come into use in the early years of this century, and denotes certain Protestant churches and organizations, more particularly those that maintain the literal divine origin and inerrancy of the Bible. In this they oppose the liberal and modernist theologians, who tend to a more critical, historical view of Scripture. Among Muslim theologians there is as yet no such liberal or modernist approach to the Qur'an, and all Muslims, in their attitude to the text of the Qur'an, are in principle at least fundamentalists. Where the so-called Muslim fundamentalists differ from other Muslims and indeed from Christian fundamentalists is in their scholasticism and their legalism. They base themselves not only on the Qur'an, but also on the Traditions of the Prophet, and on the corpus of transmitted theological and legal learning." -Bernard Lewis (leading historian of Islam)

It just seems that you base your opinion of Islam on people you've never met. All Muslims I have had the pleasure of meeting, even those who recently immigrated (within a year) to the US , have not attempted to forcefully convert me.

As I've said, the majority of Muslims who live in Western countries are usually moderate. One of the reasons for this is that if a Muslim is going to immigrate to a country of infidels then they most likely were a moderate to begin with. And commonsense should tell you that it's unusual for a minority religious group to try to convert the majority. If you moved to a majority Muslim country, chances are you would come across Muslims trying to convert you. But I'm confused, I've not once made the argument that Muslims are always trying to convert me or anything like that, so I don't know why you're suddenly bringing that up as if that was part of my argument. And remember, my problem is with the actual religion of Islam, not the people who follow it.

Your entirely wrong, the majority of all muslims are moderate. Geographical and geopolitical positioning have nothing to do with it. Ive meet muslims just visiting the US and ive talked with missionaries from several churches on how muslims behave in the middle east. Most muslims are very practical people and care not where your from or who you worship. It says in the Quran that they should respect all faiths and try not to forcefully convert people to their religion. Sure some of them have invited me to prayer with them but they never screamed "INFIDEL CONVERT OR DIE!" They are just deeply religious people who tend to their own. You cant just judge a faith on the fringe elements you have to look at the whole. In every bag of grapes theres bound to be one bad one. If you were to step back and claim everything is just as bad as its worst part then everything in this world would seem pretty rotten. I hope you drop your prejudice against Islam and see that its one of the better faiths out there.

You seem to misunderstand what fundamentalist means. It doesn't mean people who go around trying to convert others, it means people who have complete faith in the fundamentals of their religion.

The vast majority of Muslims really are fundamentalists.

"The use of this term is established and must be accepted, but it remains unfortunate and can be misleading. "Fundamentalist" is a Christian term. It seems to have come into use in the early years of this century, and denotes certain Protestant churches and organizations, more particularly those that maintain the literal divine origin and inerrancy of the Bible. In this they oppose the liberal and modernist theologians, who tend to a more critical, historical view of Scripture. Among Muslim theologians there is as yet no such liberal or modernist approach to the Qur'an, and all Muslims, in their attitude to the text of the Qur'an, are in principle at least fundamentalists. Where the so-called Muslim fundamentalists differ from other Muslims and indeed from Christian fundamentalists is in their scholasticism and their legalism. They base themselves not only on the Qur'an, but also on the Traditions of the Prophet, and on the corpus of transmitted theological and legal learning." -Bernard Lewis (leading historian of Islam)

As I've said: Extremism is the result of people taking their religion too seriously. So I don't see why I can't blame the base ideology for what extremists do. Maybe if religion had such a good effect on society in such a way that it negated all the bad that is done in it's name, but that’s just not the case, religion does nothing good that couldn’t or isn't being done by secular means. A religion is no better than the worst of it's extremists.

Lol, absurd.

to corB

i dont really know trying to say your argument seems off track can you please clarify what you are trying to say