RE: Who needs the medressahs when you have the internet
April 22, 2013 at 1:16 am
(This post was last modified: April 22, 2013 at 1:19 am by Free Thinker.)
I don't know how long you've spent outside of the Muslim world because if it has been more than 5-10 years, then you're already too far removed from the reality of the messages and deep rooted issues that have caused the situation to become what it has.
Criticizing the west for their foreign policy is one thing (and in some cases appropriate), but using it as the sole excuse for violence perpetrated by Islamists is another. This would hold true if Islam didn't perpetrate violence before the western world got involved, but countries like Pakistan, Saudia, Iraq and Iran have had religious extremism as well as bouts of extreme violence perpetrated against people of their own countries for decades before the west ever even got involved.
You also have to keep in mind that the Western war is against people who commit acts of terror and not Islam directly. It's just that pretty much most acts of terror (in recent times anyways) have been largely perpetrated by people in the name of Islam that causes this paradox and belief against Muslims and Muslim sympathizers that the war is really against Islam - when it has been stated countless times that it isn't. I agree that this does breed some generalized hatred and paranoia towards all Muslims which is also wrong - but is also continuously fought against as well. I've seen plenty of positive messages from the west decrying discrimination against the peaceful Muslims as well to know that not all Muslims are discriminated against, nor are being vilified by the world. If that had been the case, people with your religious background wouldn't even be allowed in western countries. So the tolerance and acceptance that not all Muslims are violent is there.
However, at the same time, it is also the responsibility of Muslims to acknowledge that Islam itself contains messages of violence which are used to justify violence. Do we trace all acts of violence to western foreign policy however? No. That's where you and other Muslims are wrong.
What about sectarian violence between Shias and Sunnis that's prevalent everywhere where Sunnis or Shias happen to have majority? Is the West responsible for that as well? Or is that something that's exclusively perpetrated because of extreme interpretations of Quranic injunctions preached by fundamentalist/literalist Mullahs. The core justification for violence is there in many verses:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/...olence.htm
If the religion contains messages and verses that justify violence, then violence will always be a part of that religion and people will continue to use those messages as justification for their acts. Wrongfully so.
Criticizing the west for their foreign policy is one thing (and in some cases appropriate), but using it as the sole excuse for violence perpetrated by Islamists is another. This would hold true if Islam didn't perpetrate violence before the western world got involved, but countries like Pakistan, Saudia, Iraq and Iran have had religious extremism as well as bouts of extreme violence perpetrated against people of their own countries for decades before the west ever even got involved.
You also have to keep in mind that the Western war is against people who commit acts of terror and not Islam directly. It's just that pretty much most acts of terror (in recent times anyways) have been largely perpetrated by people in the name of Islam that causes this paradox and belief against Muslims and Muslim sympathizers that the war is really against Islam - when it has been stated countless times that it isn't. I agree that this does breed some generalized hatred and paranoia towards all Muslims which is also wrong - but is also continuously fought against as well. I've seen plenty of positive messages from the west decrying discrimination against the peaceful Muslims as well to know that not all Muslims are discriminated against, nor are being vilified by the world. If that had been the case, people with your religious background wouldn't even be allowed in western countries. So the tolerance and acceptance that not all Muslims are violent is there.
However, at the same time, it is also the responsibility of Muslims to acknowledge that Islam itself contains messages of violence which are used to justify violence. Do we trace all acts of violence to western foreign policy however? No. That's where you and other Muslims are wrong.
What about sectarian violence between Shias and Sunnis that's prevalent everywhere where Sunnis or Shias happen to have majority? Is the West responsible for that as well? Or is that something that's exclusively perpetrated because of extreme interpretations of Quranic injunctions preached by fundamentalist/literalist Mullahs. The core justification for violence is there in many verses:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/...olence.htm
If the religion contains messages and verses that justify violence, then violence will always be a part of that religion and people will continue to use those messages as justification for their acts. Wrongfully so.
