(November 16, 2015 at 5:41 pm)Tiberius Wrote:(November 16, 2015 at 4:22 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I guess the one sticky point, is that the quran does, indeed, advocate for the death of kafir, and when you can't manage that, their treatment as second class citizens. The radicals aren't exactly being "un-islamic". Most people find ways to square that circle, and rightly so. Is islam to blame for the things that radical muslims do? At least in part, and when it explictly makes requests of believers, yes. To state otherwise is silly. Does this mean that all muslims will do those things, or believe that those things are righteous? No, ofc not. The offended friend is, herself, very dismissive of others religious convictions, privileging her own interpretations over those of her fellows for no discernible reason. It's hard for me to manufacture sympathy for people in that situation, personally. ISIS, for example, is as thoroughly and devoutly muslim as your offended friend, and that's something she'll probably need to come to terms with at some point. But there's no sense in stirring the pot at work in any case.
The problem is, "Islam", like "Christianity" isn't easily defined by a few quotes from scripture, but rather it changes based wholly on the sect, and the individual interpretations of the scriptures. The Bible, especially the Old Testament, is full of horrible quotes as well, but it doesn't necessarily make Christianity horrible. Really, "Islam" and "Christianity" are vast umbrella terms that try to pull together a lot of different religious groups under a common belief (for Islam, that Muhammad is the prophet; for Christianity, that Jesus is the Messiah). Apart from those common beliefs, if you were to take two Muslims at random, you would find a plethora of differing and often contradicting beliefs concerning all manner of things.
So blaming "Islam" rather than "fundamentalist Islam" or "extremist Islam" is a bit like blaming the Republicans for Bush, or the Democrats for Obama, rather than realising the truth, which is that there are reasonable Republicans and reasonable Democrats, but conversely also ass-backwards Republicans and ass-backwards Democrats too. Or another analogy, it would be like saying you hate all Pop Music because you hate Justin Bieber.
(November 16, 2015 at 4:46 pm)audiogel Wrote: With the risk of sounding childish I find that it is simply not fair that I should not be allowed to voice what I think because it's negative against religion and I certainly don't feel that I should apologise for offending her as that was never my intention - she chose to be offended. I would happily sacrifice my job in order to exercise my right to free speech. I have made it clear to her that she is a human being and for that I love her, but I happen to dislike her religion (and any other) greatly.
Don't get me wrong, you're perfectly within your rights to voice a negative opinion about anything, and you should be allowed to voice what you think. However, and this is a big however, part of having that right is knowing when to use it, and recognizing when you might upset someone with your words. Some things you just don't say, even if you believe them to be true, because ultimately, what's the point of saying them if all they are going to do is hurt someone?
In future, if you really want your thoughts to be heard, try to reword them to be less confrontational. For example, instead of coming right out and saying "I absolutely blame islam", ask "But don't ISIS get their ideas from Islam?" Immediately you have changed the tone of your words from accusational to inquisitive, which helps develop the discussion in a friendlier manner. Your colleague might respond "Yes, but it's a fundamentalist form of Islam that most Muslims don't subscribe to, so it's unfair to blame Islam as a whole", and then you can agree / disagree with them, challenge their viewpoint, etc. but in a less confrontational manner.
Thank you for your explanation and for offering another way of wording it
