I never suggested that we 'stand idly by, do nothing and tolerate the extemists'. But I don't think debilitating an entire economy because of a few extremists (statistically speaking) is the answer either. I would think that poverty would cause more extremism. In fact, I'm certain of it.
One may argue that poverty is the cause of extremism, but I would suggest that the opposite is more likely to be the case. It is the rejection of western culture and values and the maintaining of primitive tribal systems and theocracies that has kept these people poor, their restrictions on women's rights have severely limited their workforce and economic potential, making large families that are beyond one's means of support commonplace, all resources that can be produced are needed for survival, advancement is impossible. They have chosen to be poor by choosing to reject western culture and values, this truth is reinforced by the fact that we have sent billions of dollars to them in foreign aid, we have attempted to build up their economies and increase their participation in the global market, yet they are still poor and show no signs of advancing. Many Middle Eastern countries have great amounts of wealth comming in due to the value of their natural resources, but still we see very little wide spread, society-wide economic growth. These people choose to live in poverty and extremism, throwing more money at them won't help, but I can think of some other things to throw at them which may aid our cause.
This is a good point, but we're talking about the difference between a major religion and the extremists within.
They're not entirely dismissed, GiC. The average Muslim living in the Middle East does not have the where-with-all to rise up against the extremist down the street with a gun toting posse. S/he simply tries his/her best to avoid them and tells their children to do the same. And I don't recall any Islamic immigrant(s) behaving in an extremist manner (burning flags, blowing up cafe's,...). And BTW, the WTC tower murderers were not immigrants.
But the people guilty of 'honour killings' in England are immigrants. The mohammedan comes to the west and is presented with the blessings of western culture, philosophy, and society yet they reject it, they continue to oppress women and fail to embrace the ideals of egalitarianism. They still support their barbaric religious system of laws, they openly reject western civilization and attempt to destroy it by converting it to an Islamic civilization.
So, you don't lock your doors at night? I betcha do...common GiC, tell the truth now. And since you quoted the 'right to bear arms' clause, I'm assuming you have a gun? And if so, why? Assuming it's not a water gun, I'd say you're a tad bit scared.
Lock my doors? No, breaking in to an occupied house where I live is tantamount to a death sentence...it generally doesn't happen. And of course I have a gun, I would argue that it is the patriotic duty of every citizen, but that's an issue for another thread. And it is presicely because we have this right that there is no reason to fear anyone. Everyone is afforded this basic means of self-defence, so no one can truthly claim that their actions are coerced by their neighbour through fear. So those Mohammedan immigrants who fail to embrace western values and continue in their barbarism, they are without excuse.
Seemingly so, until one bothers to read about it. For one instance, did you know that the Meccan pagan elite sought to kill Muhammad, so he fled to Ethiopia, where the Christian king gave him refuge? Muhammad decreed that Ethiopia would be a protected land. Or how about the Sultan who gave special protection to Mt Athos and St Catherine's monestary? I could go on and on, but why bother? The point I'm trying to make is that there's a difference between Islam and the extremists within.
Which begs the question what where the Turks doing near Mt. Athos? There is a presumption of violent conquest to the situations you pose.
Alas, yet another uneducated statement. *Sigh* How about Algebra? It was Muslim mathematicians who invented Al-jibr (Algebra).
Stolen by military force from the Hindus, falsely claimed as their own by the Mohammedans. It was their name that stuck, and that's about the extent of their contributions.
Or maybe you'd care to look into anotomical science? Yup, Muslims drew up anotomical charts that were used from around the 12th century up until around the 18th century. I could go on and on.
As mentioned above, those charts actually came from Galen...oh, and it should be noted that they were wrong because of the over-reliance on animal anatomy. It wasn't until we started cutting up cadavers in the west that we got accurate charts.
All this when Europeans were defecating in the streets creating a situation that would devastate many countries (yup, the bubonic plague came from the enlightened West).
As mentioned above, it was another gift to the west from the Middle East...go figure.
I don't know what to say in response to this, except I'd rather listen to my 8 yr old niece sing Brittney Spears' "Oops I did it again" over and over rather than listen to this type of *reasoning*.
Makes sense, the Mohammedans reject any argument of substance, why would their sympathizers do otherwise?
Because this is a Christian forum, I expect there to be many disagreements with Islam, and rightfully so. Whatever arguments we have with Islam, bring them up and let's hear them. But when we begin to smear a people based on the actions of a violent minority, your words will ring hollow with those whom you wish to convert (and this should be your main concern), and will begin to take on an extremist outlook in the end. I'm not trying to pick on GiC, but this is an individual who espouses an extremist and exceptionally violent outlook. What truly saddens me is that not one of you responded to this statement:
Violent minority? Well, this violent minority has essentially managed to maintain a state of war with the west for the past 1400 years. You'd think the peaceful majority would manage to step up at some point. The point I've made time and time again is that while it may be true that there are extremists and moderates, the very fact that the moderates do not control the extremists and are complacent in their actions, fail to take responsibility for their country and control the extremists, and even offer material and moral support for these extremists makes them as much enemies of the west as the extremists. Would you suggest that we should not have made unrelenting war on Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan because your average person wasn't a fascist extremist and was simply trying to get by? (And the speed with which the citizens of Germany and Japan adopted our values following the war bears witness to this truth, as opposed to the reaction of the Mohammedans to our culture and values when presented to them at their feet.) The notion is absurd, citizens are responsible for the actions of their state and states are responsbile for the actions of their citizens.
"Ultimatum to the islamofascists, reject Islam..." You see, this is a major faux paux here. In six words, you just equated everyone who practices Islam as an Islamofascist.
You then go on to advocate detroying cities and making people destitute. Please help me out here. I am just naive or dumb? Is this what Christianity espouses? Or just the Christians on this forum?
I have offered them many choices, no one really wants to destory anyone, but the choice is theirs. They must reject Islam, but we will not force them to our religion, they can choose any faith they wish to practice save Islam, they can become Christians, or perhaps they'd rather become practicing Jews, they can be Hindus, or Buddhists, they can embrace the Pagan religions of old, or they are free to reject religion all together and become Agnostics or even Atheists. Or they can even keep parts of their religion, if they change it into something new, if they reject Mohammed and the Quran and the Hadith and rather turn their religion into a Humanistic expression of Western Culture and Values...at times in their history certain Sufis have made a good go at this, perhaps they could build on this and create an entirely new religion. But they cannot keep their current one, because it is incompatable with the Western Values and Culture which they must be compelled, at all costs, to embrace; it is too dangerous to allow them to do otherwise.
And before you complain of some injustice in this position remember: they started it, they struck first, they invaded the Empire, to this day they still occupy many lands that once belonged to the Empire...we, the descendants of Ancient Rome, the inheritors of the blessings of the Empire, that is to say of Western Civilization, simply intend to recover these lands and destroy the invading hordes as is our ancient right.