Muslim bigotry

[gurneyhalleck1]

Most Muslims I have met, though I seriously disagree with their religion, have about the same desire to see Americans be Muslims as you have to see Americans become Catholics. They usually have less zeal than I see in CAF from Catholics who want America to embrace the papacy and the Church. It’s only normal to want to spread your religion. Most Muslims don’t want jihad and global apocalypse. That’s the Akmadinejad extremist Iranian Imam type talk or Jihadi Al-Qada stuff. Most Muslims in the States are fairly moderate.

There were Catholics for decades in Ireland–Shin Fein and the IRA, etc. but I never thought all Catholics are terrorists.

Islam is a religion and a way of life just as Catholicism is not just a religion but a way of life. Catholicism affects diet during Lent, prayer, medical situations like conscience clauses, morality across the board, marriage, divorce, a vast array of things in the daily life of a Catholic. Same with Muslims. I have no problem with them practicing their religion until it becomes violent. To date, I have yet to see Muslims in the United States burning down buildings or blowing up the post office. There probably are some terror cells and loons but probably about the same amount as the nutty militias that live up in Montana in the middle of nowhere or the Tim McVay types.

I’m opposed to Christians tacitly being ok with Islam in a religious argument context but in daily civic life I have no choice but to be respectful and tolerant of them. We live in a pluralistic culture not a theocracy. But when it comes to my Catholic parish church, I don’t want to see “Understanding Islam” in my parish hall!! That’s different.

Islam is not merely a religion. It has a religious component, but it is a complete system of life, much more than a religion. We have been deluded for decades about what Islam really is. If it is merely a religion, then our Constitution protects its followers. But if it is a total system of life including its own system of laws (Sharia) then it is contrary to our Constitution and must not be tolerated. The religious aspect of Islam is like the Trojan Horse that allows the other components into our nation and other nations, and then the other components can take over and allow Islam to dominate. That is what Muslims are supposed to do, to gain the world for Allah. In any way necessary - thus, there have been over 16,000 deadly terrorist attacks just since 9/11/2001.

thereligionofpeace.com

 

[Tsuwano]

Islam is not merely a religion. It has a religious component, but it is a complete system of life, much more than a religion. We have been deluded for decades about what Islam really is. If it is merely a religion, then our Constitution protects its followers. But if it is a total system of life including its own system of laws (Sharia) then it is contrary to our Constitution and must not be tolerated. The religious aspect of Islam is like the Trojan Horse that allows the other components into our nation and other nations, and then the other components can take over and allow Islam to dominate. That is what Muslims are supposed to do, to gain the world for Allah. In any way necessary - thus, there have been over 16,000 deadly terrorist attacks just since 9/11/2001.

thereligionofpeace.com

In your second sentence you state that Islam “is a complete system of life, much more than a religion.” Later in your paragraph you state “If it is a total system of life including its own system of laws, then it is contrary to our Constitution and must not be tolerated.” Leaving out the argument that many believe Christianity is a complete system of life as well, I’m puzzled as to what you mean when you say that Islam must not be tolerated. What, exactly, are you proposing. Other posters have claimed that no one is advocating racist or unjust actions against Muslims, but then what does it mean when we say we must keep Muslims in check or that their religion must not be tolerated? Spell it out for me, please. What actions are you advocating against Muslims when you state that Islam must not be tolerated?

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I’m a little fuzzy about those statements as well. The post seems to say that Muslims should not be able to enter the country and the ones here should be deported. If their religion is a thread to the United States as the “way of life” approach spells out, then they are an enemy of the State.

I agree that Sharia law should NOT be allowed by the constitution but the Islamic religion should be. We can’t tell people how to worship and believe but we cannot allow Sharia because it usurps the constitution and the rights and laws that govern this land.

In your second sentence you state that Islam “is a complete system of life, much more than a religion.” Later in your paragraph you state “If it is a total system of life including its own system of laws, then it is contrary to our Constitution and must not be tolerated.” Leaving out the argument that many believe Christianity is a complete system of life as well, I’m puzzled as to what you mean when you say that Islam must not be tolerated. What, exactly, are you proposing. Other posters have claimed that no one is advocating racist or unjust actions against Muslims, but then what does it mean when we say we must keep Muslims in check or that their religion must not be tolerated? Spell it out for me, please. What actions are you advocating against Muslims when you state that Islam must not be tolerated?

 

[Tsuwano]

Most Muslims I have met, though I seriously disagree with their religion, have about the same desire to see Americans be Muslims as you have to see Americans become Catholics. They usually have less zeal than I see in CAF from Catholics who want America to embrace the papacy and the Church. It’s only normal to want to spread your religion. Most Muslims don’t want jihad and global apocalypse. That’s the Akmadinejad extremist Iranian Imam type talk or Jihadi Al-Qada stuff. Most Muslims in the States are fairly moderate.

There were Catholics for decades in Ireland–Shin Fein and the IRA, etc. but I never thought all Catholics are terrorists.

Islam is a religion and a way of life just as Catholicism is not just a religion but a way of life. Catholicism affects diet during Lent, prayer, medical situations like conscience clauses, morality across the board, marriage, divorce, a vast array of things in the daily life of a Catholic. Same with Muslims. I have no problem with them practicing their religion until it becomes violent. To date, I have yet to see Muslims in the United States burning down buildings or blowing up the post office. There probably are some terror cells and loons but probably about the same amount as the nutty militias that live up in Montana in the middle of nowhere or the Tim McVay types.

I’m opposed to Christians tacitly being ok with Islam in a religious argument context but in daily civic life I have no choice but to be respectful and tolerant of them. We live in a pluralistic culture not a theocracy. But when it comes to my Catholic parish church, I don’t want to see “Understanding Islam” in my parish hall!! That’s different.

I can agree with almost everything you say here, Gurney, and I can understand your hesitancy in seeing a lecture on understanding Islam in your parish hall. At the same time, I think Catholicism does have a role to play in building the trust between peoples of different faiths to help us all get along in this increasingly diverse society we live in. Perhaps it was unwise for your parish priest to schedule a lecture in your parish hall, but the dialogue between peoples of different faiths has to happen on the grassroots level, as well as in theological circles, for that trust to be strengthened. I suppose in previous decades, when the dialogue was more between Catholics and Protestants or Christians and Jews, or even between Blacks and Whites, such bonds of trust were built in the military or in factories or in bowling leagues or any other social groups where different peoples gathered to get to know one another. I think it’s a wonderful sign of the Holy Spirit among us that the Church is active in seeking this dialogue in our parishes, as well as in our universities. I understand that sensitivity and understanding are required for such work to take place on the parish level, and perhaps this is where your priest went astray, but I still think the local parish has to be involved if this dialogue thing is going to work. I would add, by the way, that I personally do not equate Islam and Christianity as theologically the same or think that Islam is a superior faith to Christianity. I do not, otherwise I would be Muslim. I’m firmly committed to my Catholic faith, even while recognizing the goodwill of most Muslim people.

 

[Tsuwano]

I’m a little fuzzy about those statements as well. The post seems to say that Muslims should not be able to enter the country and the ones here should be deported. If their religion is a thread to the United States as the “way of life” approach spells out, then they are an enemy of the State.

I agree that Sharia law should NOT be allowed by the constitution but the Islamic religion should be. We can’t tell people how to worship and believe but we cannot allow Sharia because it usurps the constitution and the rights and laws that govern this land.

I agree with this post.

 

[crazzeto]

I’m not sure what all the hooplah and debate here is. Islam is contrary to Christ and in fact denies the divinity, sonship, and salvific work of Christ Jesus. While it contains kernels of truth in it, as many religions do, it is fundamentally dangerous. Nobody here is saying we should use violence against muslims. No one is saying to be racist, prejudiced, or to exclude them from American life. No one is saying they’re less than human or second class citizens.

But I think CCC 841 in the catechism is dangerous, misguided, and disturbing. I also think when my own pastor at my Catholic church here in town invites an Islamic scholar to teach in our big parish hall “Understanding Islam,” then we’re in trouble. If Catholics want to know about Islam, go to the library and check out a book but what my pastor did was tantamount to a subtle endorsement and relativistic buddy-buddy religious thought.

We must proclaim Christ and Christ alone. We cannot ever tolerate the religion of Islam but we must be charitable and kind to our fellow Muslims. I think most people here are saying words to that effect?

CCC 841:

841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”

I don’t so much see a danger, as just a plain truth. In fact this teaching comes out of the second vatican council I do beileve. Seeking the truth is always frought with danger though I suppose, even St. Peter referred to the ingnorant and unwise who twisted the letters and gosples which were being written by the Apostles at that time to their own destruction.

I guess I can sort of see where your coming from in so far as some one possibly misreading what the Church wrote and deriving something from it which it does not state. But again, people were doing that to the scriptures we regard as sacrade even in the lifetime of the Apostles them selves.

 

[jam070406]

I’m not concerned with how Muslims live their faith, but how I live mine. Not all Muslims broke out in violence at the Pope’s statement. Not all Muslims are targeting Christians. We should be careful about tarring all Muslims with the reprehensible actions of some. Having said that, I think it is appropriate for Christians and people of other faiths to challenge Muslims when they fail to live up to the very creeds they profess. This is why dialogue and mutual respect are so necessary today. Dialogue is born of trust. What is lacking, I believe, are forums by which trust between people of differing faiths can develope and mature.

How many Muslims stood up before the Muslim world and said, you know, the Pope has a point, maybe we should listen?

 

[jakasaki]

Originally Posted by jam070406
There is a Coptic Priest (forget his name) that is a target for Muslims because he has been converting them in droves. Not by being nice, but by shaking them out their belief by standing up against it and outright declaring it false.

Father Zakaria Botros is a Coptic priest from Egypt.

Is that whom you are thinking about…?

 

[jam070406]

Father Zakaria Botros is a Coptic priest from Egypt.

Is that whom you are thinking about…?

Yes, thank you!

Is he a convert?

 

[jakasaki]

Yes, thank you!

Is he a convert?

No Jam, he is not a convert. He was always a Copt Christian.

 

[Captain_America]

The core of the problem is that IF muslims insist upon sharia law, THEN they really ARE opposed to the United States Constitution and its history of interpretation.

I like equality among people, fairness, and tolerance of religious conscience.

 

[GaryTaylor]

The core of the problem is that IF muslims insist upon sharia law, THEN they really ARE opposed to the United States Constitution and its history of interpretation.

I like equality among people, fairness, and tolerance of religious conscience.

And there’s a good article by the Catholic American on this which you can google. And here is the problem. If we can live in Harmony then there is no problem, but if we can’t, then there is a problem.

And Sharia Law is the problem. Personally I don’t care who you pray to. And how you chose to live your life. In “your” personal world its your business. But when you would like to impose you will on me? Then we do have a problem, and that is the problem.

All that skin color, ethnic background, how you talk, Yankees, Rebels, Aliens, Cowboys. Outlaws whatever. That all is not the issue, and is a distraction from the point. There is no bigotry. Thats the “illusion”. People from everywhere in the World been coming to America from DAY ONE. To live the way WE LIVE HERE! In Harmony, Freedom and Peace. And thats how Islam must live here. Not maybe, its not an option.

841 and V-II Doctrine Lumin Gentium is not the issue, that just confuse’s the issue. So definately lets see it for what it is…Ecumenism. Thats all it is. Thats not gonna change it “is” Benedicts main issue as Pope. But my point is lets not confuse it for Christianity.

I don’t even know where to go with that anymore. Thats a lesson in ignorance IMHO

God Bless, Gary

 

[crazzeto]

Crazzeto, I fear you are not reading my posts very carefully. Please refer to post # 70, specifically the second sentence of that post. Perhaps we are closer in opinion that you realize.

Tsuwano,

I don’t think that’s the case based upon what I quoted. Ghettos, disallowing religious dress et. al. I think I understood you loud and clear actually, that was my response to your posting.

God bless,

 

[Tsuwano]

Tsuwano,

I don’t think that’s the case based upon what I quoted. Ghettos, disallowing religious dress et. al. I think I understood you loud and clear actually, that was my response to your posting.

God bless,

Crazzeto, my reference to ghettos and disallowing religious dress was a response to your own post about the need to keep Muslims “in check.” I was asking what this meant. Does it mean keeping Muslims in ghettos or refusing them the freedom to wear religious dress? If I understood you correctly, you said that no, it didn’t. You went on to say, in post 73, “Basically it means an understanding that they are not in fact the majority, and there for they can’t expect the rest of society to bend over backwards to accomodate their every whim which you keep wanting to do , particularly in this very posting here.” I responded to this by suggesting that our opinions are not that different. I refered you to a sentence in a previous post, post 70, in which I wrote “We should attempt to accomodate the needs of the minority communities in our midst to the degree that we can without betraying or giving up those values which define us as a community.” This sentence shows that I do not believe in bending over backwards to accomodate every whim of minority groups in society, but only to the point that we can without betraying our own values which define us as a community. I hope this clarifies my thinking a bit more.

 

[JaredM]

The core of the problem is that IF muslims insist upon sharia law, THEN they really ARE opposed to the United States Constitution and its history of interpretation.

I like equality among people, fairness, and tolerance of religious conscience.

There are more Christians who keep on asserting that America is a 'Christian nation" then are are Muslims trying to apply Sharia law. In fact I have yet to even hear of such a thing in America.

 

[Tsuwano]

There are more Christians who keep on asserting that America is a 'Christian nation" then are are Muslims trying to apply Sharia law. In fact I have yet to even hear of such a thing in America.

You know, I’ve been wondering about that myself. Someone said in his post that there have been court cases in some states where Muslims have sued to impose sharia law or something like that, but I’ve never heard of them. And even if this is true, I can’t imagine a judge settling a case in favor of sharia law. I guess I’ll have to do some research on it.

 

[GaryTaylor]

There are more Christians who keep on asserting that America is a 'Christian nation" then are are Muslims trying to apply Sharia law. In fact I have yet to even hear of such a thing in America.

Its a simple statistical fact of the population in American being Christian. The fact that no-one is proudly running around claiming it only speaks for the nature of Catholics and most Christians.

As far as sharia law how it grows in favor, as the Isamic population grows is also a statistical fact.

Aside from that I’m not sure what your saying or how it relates to the OP? The points are in referrence to Muslin Bigotry which I fail to see in the US. I see reverse racism. And that is a statistical fact also. The Nation of Islam is a Hate group and has been identified as such, Homeland security is now investigating Islam through witness’s who have came foward since last week on Good Morning America. This is documented, been talked about here, with links posted. Its a fact.

So since I’m not a racist I find it offensive. The fact that Christians are trying to stay ahead of a potential problem seem’s to be the only area that people actually have a problem with.

History clearly shows we should be skeptical with any proposed type of violence which appears contrary to the Bible. One of the Seven Deadly sins of the devil is Wrath. Islam is no stranger to violence. Look at the thread here about Nazi Germany. Today we are placed under the microscope and condemed for not acting fast enough.

No different than with Libya. The week before the conflict Congess could not act fast enough. The week of the confict they want to impeach the President.

I guess you just can’t please everyone. But we are going to do the best we can to stay ahead of a problem. Because when you don’t then the true children of God are the one’s who suffer. Their blood is used to wash and purify the ground again.

 

[crazzeto]

Crazzeto, my reference to ghettos and disallowing religious dress was a response to your own post about the need to keep Muslims “in check.” I was asking what this meant. Does it mean keeping Muslims in ghettos or refusing them the freedom to wear religious dress? If I understood you correctly, you said that no, it didn’t. You went on to say, in post 73, “Basically it means an understanding that they are not in fact the majority, and there for they can’t expect the rest of society to bend over backwards to accomodate their every whim which you keep wanting to do , particularly in this very posting here.” I responded to this by suggesting that our opinions are not that different. I refered you to a sentence in a previous post, post 70, in which I wrote “We should attempt to accomodate the needs of the minority communities in our midst to the degree that we can without betraying or giving up those values which define us as a community.” This sentence shows that I do not believe in bending over backwards to accomodate every whim of minority groups in society, but only to the point that we can without betraying our own values which define us as a community. I hope this clarifies my thinking a bit more.

Tsuwano,

The paramaters were already in my postings… “Do not cause undo harm”, “Recogonize they are the face of the living God”… Ask your self if what you posted is compatable with those standards.

So yes, I read and fully understood your posting. And that was my answer.

 

[Tsuwano]

Tsuwano,

The paramaters were already in my postings… “Do not cause undo harm”, “Recogonize they are the face of the living God”… Ask your self if what you posted is compatable with those standards.

So yes, I read and fully understood your posting. And that was my answer.

“Do not cause undue harm.” “Recognize they are the face of the living God.” But keep them “in check.” Which means? I don’t know. You haven’t actually defined what you mean by that, but hey, I’ll take your word for it. You must mean something . . . benign. I won’t push it any farther.

 

[Captain_America]

With respect to “muslim bigotry” this really meant hypocrisy in terms of the issue of tolerance.

In the middle east, there are plentiful, plentiful deaths and bombings that muslims proudly claim as their doing. . . many of which are anti-Christian, and based on harming a religion.

Yet at the same time, I have run into instances in which muslims assert that religious tolerance is a GOOD thing in America, when they want to build mosques, in particular.

Well, if religious tolerance is good for muslims to benefit from, they need to extend this to Christians.

In America, where are the muslim leaders speaking out against anti-Christian violence?