Why do a lot of American Catholics not like Muslims?

[Eric_Hilbert]

Please observe the forum rules for inter-religious discussion.
The question was not about 911, please answer like adults.

 

[808Catholic]

From what I’ve read, catholiceducation.org/en/religion-and-philosophy/other-religions/islam.html and other (links that follow) from its inception,** Islam and Jihad**, were together. NOT seperate. (can they even be seperated if one is Muslim?)

Therefore, from it’s origin / beginning, it was NOT a religion of peace, spread by love of God with one’s whole heart soul, mind, and strength, and love of neighbor as themselves, but was a religion spread by the sword. Mohammed and Mohammedanism

By “rest of the Christian Church” do you mean those Eastern Catholic Christians who ultimately seperated from the Catholic Church and called themselves the Orthodox? Before that split happened, their populations that usually split along ethnic lines, had already suffered descimation among their populations by Islam’s advance. The Crusades were also designed to liberate THEM from that persecution as well.

After 400+ years of Islamic Jihad, the writing was on the wall. Pope Urban II called for the Crusades. It’s clear to me, the crusades were a defensive move not an offensive one. From conception, Islam grew by the sword NOT by peaceful means. Neither Christians nor any non Muslim were safe nor had a right to exist as Christian, Jew, etc etc. Even today, many Muslims not cut from a certain brand of Muslim, aren’t safe among their own either. It needs to be said though, that in the beginning of Islam, the choice was either convert to Islam, be a slave, or die. After 400+ years of that carnage and exodus of Christians from their lands & particularly holy sites in Christendom, the first crusade was called for by Pope Urban. I say that again. AFTER 400+ years of persecution and brutality against Christians, THEN the pope acted against the persecuters…

It’s also the case where people fear MOST what they** DO understand**.

catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/the-crusades/the-real-history-of-the-crusades.html

A fool otoh, is a person who lacks good sense or judgment in the information that is there for them to see.

Unfortunately there are too many people IMV, that fall into the last category.

There’s also the problem that there are too many people who don’t read history. Those folks will surely repeat the mistakes of the past because they don’t know the past… But let’s say even if one knows nothing of the past, they can look at this subject first hand from what is in the here & now… When certain muslims get control of a country, and their law is now the only one that exists. How does that go for the survival of any other religion in **that **country? The answer is, it is disasterous. Looking back at history, that’s NOT new to Islam in general, nor just with any certain brand of Islam today. Even though to be fair, Islam has factions within itself today, and within these brands, there is intollerance with each other as well.

But that only raises the questions. Out of 1.5 billion members,

• which Muslim country today displays peace and tollerance for other religions? Which do NOT?

If it can be asked this way,

• how big is the Islam that wants to convert the world by jihad?

Especially considering the Quran / Koran teaches Jihad (holy war) against pagans Jews and Christians

catholiceducation.org/en/religion-and-philosophy/other-religions/islam.html

@steve b
You’ve responded to my post with pretty much opposition opinions. What is your stance? Do we as Catholics love our Muslim brothers and sisters as Christ commands or do we hate them?

 

[steve_b]

@steve b
You’ve responded to my post with pretty much opposition opinions. What is your stance? Do we as Catholics love our Muslim brothers and sisters as Christ commands or do we hate them?

Re: your post #[7 (http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13015153&postcount=7)

I chose to answer the latter part of your post, where you start with “today there are misconceptions…”. . I never used the word hate, nor even suggested hate anyone anywhere in my response. #[14 (http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13017005&postcount=14)

So, let me turn your question around.

Paul is talking about correcting another Christian here who is in heresy, who won’t be corrected in their thinking.

[Titus 3:10 (Titus 3:10 RSVCE - As for a man who is factious, after - Bible Gateway)
“As for a man who is factious ( [αἱρετικὸν (http://bibleapps.com/greek/141.htm) heretic ), after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him, 11 knowing that such a person is perverted and sinful; he is self-condemned.”

Is that unloving of Paul or un-Christ like of him, to teach that a heretic who refuses to change after 2 attempts to change him

• have nothing more to do with that person
• knowing they are perverted and self condemned

How would you respond to that, given the case of a terrorist for example?

 

[808Catholic]

Re: your post #[7 (http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13015153&postcount=7)

I chose to answer the latter part of your post, where you start with “today there are misconceptions…”. . I never used the word hate, nor even suggested hate anyone anywhere in my response. #[14 (http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13017005&postcount=14)

So, let me turn your question around.

Paul is talking about correcting another Christian here who is in heresy, who won’t be corrected in their thinking.

[Titus 3:10 (Titus 3:10 RSVCE - As for a man who is factious, after - Bible Gateway)
“As for a man who is factious ( [α (http://bibleapps.com/greek/141.htm)ἱρετικὸ****ν heretic ), after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him, 11 knowing that such a person is perverted and sinful; he is self-condemned.”

Is that unloving of Paul or un-Christ like of him, to teach that a heretic who refuses to change after 2 attempts to change him

• have nothing more to do with that person
• knowing they are perverted and self condemned

How would you respond to that, given the case of a terrorist for example?

As you point out, this relates to a Christian in heresy. Muslims are not Christians and do not believe themselves Christians so no heresy can exist. They have a different understanding of God and practice their religion differently. Do you believe terrorism is part of a Muslim’s religious practice?

 

[steve_b]

As you point out, this relates to a Christian in heresy. Muslims are not Christians and do not believe themselves Christians so no heresy can exist. They have a different understanding of God and practice their religion differently. Do you believe terrorism is part of a Muslim’s religious practice?

All I was doing by quoting Paul is using Paul’s prescription for one dealing with another on disagreements and correction in faith issues.

As to your question here, actually I already answered it in my 1st post with the following link.

Contrast Paul’s teaching which I quoted previously with the link that follows.

I provided this link in my original response to you #14 . Did you read it? Especially the part about the Koran / Quran and “Holy War” which is what jihad means and what the Koran teaches on that?
catholiceducation.org/en/religion-and-philosophy/other-religions/islam.html

I’ll highlight the section in that link that I think answers your question. Therefore in this section, (all emphasis is mine)

Not the least embarrassing provisions of the Koran for Moslem commentators are those advocating a Holy War, Jihad, against pagans, Jews and Christians. Yet these prescriptions are historically most significant to explain the propagation of Islam for upwards of a thousand years. Three passages are classic and deserve to be quoted in full.

First is a duty stated in general terms, in the same context with pilgrimages and fasting. Its language recalls the situation that Mohammed faced in his conflict with the recalcitrant Meccans who resisted his revelations.
Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but do not transgress limits, for Allah loves not transgressors. Slay them whenever you find them and drive them from whence they have expelled you, for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter. Fight them on until sedition is no more and allegiance is rendered to God alone. But if they desist, then make no aggression except against evildoers.25
The foregoing was not merely directive but prescriptive, and not only for the early period of Moslem origins but for all its subsequent history. Yet it does not so directly touch the grave issue of ordering the sword for the extension and not only for the preservation of Islam. Two other passages do so overtly and have for centuries been understood to refer to Jews and Christians, besides the pagan polytheists.
When the Sacred Months (of truce) are over, kill those who ascribe partners to God, wheresoever you find them. Seize them, encompass them, and ambush them. Then if they repent and observe the prayer, and pay the alms, let them go their way. Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the last day, who prohibit not what God and His prophet have forbidden, and who refuse allegiance to the True Faith until they pay the tribute readily after being brought low. The Jews say, “Fzra is the son of Allah,” and the Christians say, “Christ is the son of Allah;” that is their saying with their mouth. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah Himself fights against them. How perverse they are!26
This duty of waging a Holy War against unbelievers is a collective obligation, not an individual one. According to Islamic tradition, the world is divided into subjugated zones and regions not yet under Moslem control. To conquer the latter is an apostolic venture and those who die in the cause are not dead. “They are living. With their Lord they have provision, rejoicing because of that which Allah has bestowed upon them of His bounty.”
While it is impossible to find a complete consensus of Moslem opinion on the subject, modern Islamic commentators fairly agree on certain general facts and interpretations about the Holy War. Next to their attitude toward women, they feel that Moslems have been most misinterpreted in their attitude toward the use of force.
Apologists for the more liberal view, who are in the majority, admit that the Koran teaches the Jihad, but they insist this should be balanced by other verses where toleration is proclaimed. There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error.For each one We have appointed a divine law and traced out a way. Had Allah willed, He could have made you one community. But that He may try you by that which He has given you (He has made you as you are), wherefore press forward in good works. Unto Allah you will all return, and He will then tell you concerning that wherein you disagree.
Say: O disbelievers! I worship not that which you worship; nor do you worship that which I worship. And I shall not worship that which you worship, nor will you worship that which I worship. Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.27
When reflecting on their record in history, Moslems admit to the widespread use of force, but make the countercharge that every religion at some stages in its career has been used by its professors to mask aggressions and Islam is no exception. They make three basic denials in this area: that Islam’s record of intolerance is greater than that of other major religions, that Western histories have been fair to Islam in their accounts of its use of force, and that blots on their history are due to the principles of their faith.

Does that answer your question?

 

[808Catholic]

All I was doing by quoting Paul is using Paul’s prescription for one dealing with another on disagreements and correction in faith issues.

As to your question here, actually I already answered it in my 1st post with the following link.

Contrast Paul’s teaching which I quoted previously with the link that follows.

I provided this link in my original response to you #14 . Did you read it? Especially the part about the Koran / Quran and “Holy War” which is what jihad means and what the Koran teaches on that?
catholiceducation.org/en/religion-and-philosophy/other-religions/islam.html

I’ll highlight the section in that link that I think answers your question. Therefore in this section, (all emphasis is mine)

Does that answer your question?

Go with peace, brother.

 

[Kal2012]

You must realize that American media is bombarded with anti-Islam fear mongering (this same tactic has been employed by the media against African-Americans for a very long time, imagine you are part of both groups). This fuels the “weariness” of many Americans.

I also believe it depends on where you are geographically.

Yep - 9/11 changed a lot of things.

I live in Michigan and we have the largest population of Arab Americans outside of the Middle East.

People don’t like seeing their culture disappear. Areas that used to be Catholic enclaves are now Muslim enclaves. Change is hard. Still, people don’t like terrorists and people who move here bring their cultural norms with them. So, it’s a struggle between the “new and the old”.

 

[HungerNThirst4R]

In the Torah, God has at least two names, Elohim and Jehovah/Yahweh. Which is the one that, according to your information, is “so sacred that definitely no Torahs publish it"?

“Elohim” comes from “El” the top diety of the Canaanites that early Hebrew people were believed to worship. The sacred name YHWH (please, the Pope has asked us not to say it or write it. Use the Tetragrammaton please and thank you) as well as the even more sacred version in which God in the OT and in the Person of Jesus said when reveling the Divine Name (I will not write it in its original form out of respect) is I AM. YHWH is the way the Israelites would say it “God IS with us” roughly translated.

The thing is, you need to have at least a slight understanding of biblical Hebrew and Greek to understand these things. Which is why it is respectable that Muslims try to teach followers to read the original Arabic translation. I think there would be a lot more Catholics if we did the same with the Bible

Also “Jehovah” is a poor translation. there is no “Juh” sound in Hebrew. Try to tell that to JW when they come to your door smh:shrug:

 

[HungerNThirst4R]

Where did the author of the Quran get his information from about the early life of Mary? Are his sources reliable? And, if so, how can you be sure of that?

How are we sure of anything? Faith. If your are Muslim you believe the Qur’an was authored by God, not divinely inspired but literally dictated by God and written down by Muhammad.

Now, we(Catholics/tradition/scholars) believe that the Bible was divinely inspired and written by possibly hundreds (including redactors, etc.) of authors. How can we be sure of that? Faith.

Faith, faith, faith. Don’t bash other peoples faith. Love others how you love yourself and treat others how you want to be treated.

Religious freedom and tolerance should be for everyone to the extent that we use it responsibly and not to harm/bash/hate others. You don’t have to believe in Islam, Muslims aren’t beating down your doors trying to convert you.

 

[steve_b]

How are we sure of anything? Faith. If your are Muslim you believe the Qur’an was authored by God, not divinely inspired but literally dictated by God and written down by Muhammad.

Now, we(Catholics/tradition/scholars) believe that the Bible was divinely inspired and written by possibly hundreds (including redactors, etc.) of authors. How can we be sure of that? Faith.

For clarification, did you mean to say those that copied over time, not authors?

 

[Ignatius]

Hello everyone. I am 17 years old. I have noticed on these forums and a lot of other places that American Catholics seem not to trust Muslim people

Let me preface this by saying I don’t necessarily subscribe to this position, but to answer your question about why some Americans distrust some Muslims.
I have been told by a number of people that they are apprehensive because of the Muslim doctrines of Al-taqiyya and tawriya. Now many Muslims who do not follow the Quaran are as faithful Americans as any of us. But the problem is, they say, we cannot know because of Al-taqiyya and tawriya. Under these Islamic doctrines, it is permissible even for a Muslim to swear when lying through tawriya.They cite the authoritative Hans Wehr Arabic-English Dictionary defines tawriya as, “hiding, concealment; dissemblance, dissimulation, hypocrisy; equivocation, ambiguity, double-entendre, allusion.” All these are legitimate according to Sharia law and do not constitute “lying,” which is otherwise forbidden in Islam.

This is why some people have a mistrust, not because all Muslims are not trustworthy, but because you cannot tell who is and who isn’t.

Another reason that I’ve heard is because of recent statements by the Islamic State quoted here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=961325
Samir Khalil Samir is fairly well known. He wrote a book, “111 Questions on Islam” which was well reviewed on Amazon. He has been cited in other more scholarly works.

One quotation from the story bears repetition: “…but the movement [ISIS, extremism] will continue because it is part of Islam.”

Here are some references to the information:
shop.catholic.com/not-peace-but-a-sword-the-great-chasm-between-christianity-and-islam-set.html
One quotation from the story bears repetition: “…but the movement [ISIS extremism] will continue because it is part of Islam.”

Again, this is what I have been told as to why some people feel that Muslim doctrines of Al-taqiyya and tawriya make it difficult for them to know who to trust and the problem of The Islamic State which is no longer confined to Iraq and Syria but into North Africa, sub-Saharan Africa and the Sinai Peninsula.

jihadwatch.org/2012/02/raymond-ibrahim-tawriya-new-islamic-doctrine-permits-creative-lying.

 

[Tax_Collector14]

Actually, for a very balanced view, listen to the debate between Robert Spencer (jihadwatch.com) and Peter Kreeft (professor at Boston College)…both are faithful Catholics (Spencer is a Deacon and Kreeft, a brilliant academic) and each presents a perception of Islam that is unique. Personally, I find myself identifying closely with each at different points of my life…very suspicious of Islam when I see a terrorist attack and no ‘moderate’ Muslim backlash (protests abound when a cartoon of the Prophet is drawn, yet where are the protests when the innocent are slain in the name of Islam?), yet impressed by the rigors and dedication that Muslims will go to to practice their faith…all for God.

Check out the the debate:

youtube.com/watch?v=UMtqCapeVRA

 

[Pythons]

Actually, for a very balanced view, listen to the debate between Robert Spencer (jihadwatch.com) and Peter Kreeft (professor at Boston College)…both are faithful Catholics (Spencer is a Deacon and Kreeft, a brilliant academic) and each presents a perception of Islam that is unique. Personally, I find myself identifying closely with each at different points of my life…very suspicious of Islam when I see a terrorist attack and no ‘moderate’ Muslim backlash (protests abound when a cartoon of the Prophet is drawn, yet where are the protests when the innocent are slain in the name of Islam?), yet impressed by the rigors and dedication that Muslims will go to to practice their faith…all for God.

Check out the the debate:

youtube.com/watch?v=UMtqCapeVRA

There will never be a “Muslim backlash” by non - practicing Muslims or luke-warm Muslims toward Devout or “Fundamentalist” Muslims…
…It would be like expecting to see a backlash directed at Devout Catholics by non-practicing Catholics.
…The non-practicing Catholics will be, for the most part, SILENT.

Looking at it from this logical perspective a bad Muslims ( according to our way of thinking is good )…
…And a good Muslim ( or better said Devout or Fundamentalist Muslim ) is BAD to our way of thinking.

Think of it this way - if Muslim REALLY believes that their God is real…
…They are going to act in accordance with that belief.
…And that means direct participation in those things many in the West abhor.

 

[hasantas]

From what I’ve read, catholiceducation.org/en/religion-and-philosophy/other-religions/islam.html and other (links that follow) from its inception,** Islam and Jihad**, were together. NOT seperate. (can they even be seperated if one is Muslim?)

…

• how big is the Islam that wants to convert the world by jihad?

Especially considering the Quran / Koran teaches Jihad (holy war) against pagans Jews and Christians

catholiceducation.org/en/religion-and-philosophy/other-religions/islam.html

Do you know what exactly Jihad means? It is mentioned Jihad as only war in that web.

Jihad means to struggle. Jihad has four parts mainly.

1. To struggle against self evil desires. That is the most importand part of Jihad.
2. To struggle against evils and to struggle spread faith by wisdom. That is the most significant part of Jihad.
3. To struggle to spend self assets to support faith and religion. There are many ways of that.
4. To struggle against evils and bloody with sword and to preserve Islamic country with sword(weapon).

So if you could see there is no reason in Jihad to sanctify religion or faith to others. Because Qur’an ban that. And also there is no mean in faith which was sanctified by sword.

256- There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing. Al-Baqarah

Ofcourse there are some orders in some verses which allow and order Muslims to fight. But those were because of retaliation and for self guard. Because pagans attacked believers by sword so Muslims retaliated. And also some Islamic states had attacked others but that is not directly order of religion. There are few numbers of wars of which reason was religion.

Islam informs that the doctrines such like trinity is not true. But Islam do not reject Christianity. So we can discuss such issues. But Christians should not hate Muslims because of they do not accept such doctrines. These doctrines were established by people later. And there are many conflicts in those. If Christians could prove their arguments so they shuld do. If Muslims bring some evidences so Christians should refuse them if they could.

 

[steve_b]

Do you know what exactly Jihad means? It is mentioned Jihad as only war in that web.

under the heading of War in that article I quoted from, it says (emphasis mine)

Holy War
“Not the least embarrassing provisions of the Koran for Moslem commentators are those advocating a Holy War, Jihad, against pagans, Jews and Christians”…
h:

Jihad means to struggle. Jihad has four parts mainly.

1. To struggle against self evil desires. That is the most importand part of Jihad.
2. To struggle against evils and to struggle spread faith by wisdom. That is the most significant part of Jihad.
3. To struggle to spend self assets to support faith and religion. There are many ways of that.
4. To struggle against evils and bloody with sword and to preserve Islamic country with sword(weapon).

So if you could see there is no reason in Jihad to sanctify religion or faith to others. Because Qur’an ban that. And also there is no mean in faith which was sanctified by sword.

256- There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing. Al-Baqarah

Ofcourse there are some orders in some verses which allow and order Muslims to fight. But those were because of retaliation and for self guard. Because pagans attacked believers by sword so Muslims retaliated. And also some Islamic states had attacked others but that is not directly order of religion. There are few numbers of wars of which reason was religion.

Here is what the world sees

Catholics being slaughtered in Iraq, Iran, and Syria by Muslims TODAY under Jihad. They are being slaughtered because they are Christian. Do a google search yourself for the most horrible pictures of what is going on in those countries by Muslim Jihadists against Christians.
h:

Islam informs that the doctrines such like trinity is not true. But Islam do not reject Christianity. So we can discuss such issues. But Christians should not hate Muslims because of they do not accept such doctrines. These doctrines were established by people later. And there are many conflicts in those. If Christians could prove their arguments so they shuld do. If Muslims bring some evidences so Christians should refuse them if they could.

Look at all the carnage that is going on in the name of Islam, in the countries I’ve mentioned … Crucifixions, beheadings of adults and children, just because they are Christian

Do a google search yourself.

That is what the world is seeing daily , not just Americans that see this.

 

[hasantas]

under the heading of War in that article I quoted from, it says (emphasis mine)

Holy War
“Not the least embarrassing provisions of the Koran for Moslem commentators are those advocating a Holy War, Jihad, against pagans, Jews and Christians”…

Here is what the world sees

Catholics being slaughtered in Iraq, Iran, and Syria by Muslims TODAY under Jihad. They are being slaughtered because they are Christian. Do a google search yourself for the most horrible pictures of what is going on in those countries by Muslim Jihadists against Christians.

Look at all the carnage that is going on in the name of Islam, in the countries I’ve mentioned … Crucifixions, beheadings of adults and children, just because they are Christian

Do a google search yourself.

That is what the world is seeing daily , not just Americans that see this.

Do you know how many Muslims die in a day in those countries? Millions of Muslims are refugees. Ofcourse Muslims kill each others but there are very serious political and ethnical problems in those regions. But people kill each other in the name of God. People use the religion as an instrument to justify their outrages. We all must condemn these atrocities and we should help each other to solve those conflicts.

 

[Pythons]

The following types of accounts are common from areas that are Islamic…
…They are difficult to understand coming from a perspective that a female is equal to a male.
…Whereas her own determination on who she marries AND AT WHAT age is concerned.

"LAGOS, Nigeria – A child forced to marry at just 13 who then poisoned her 35-year-old husband and three friends is set to be freed in Nigeria, lawyers and a judge said Wednesday, amid fears for her safety and future.

Human rights lawyer Hussaina Aliyu Ibrahim said she convinced the prosecutor to drop the case and on Tuesday a High Court judge in Gezawa ordered Wasila Tasi’u to be released from juvenile detention.

She can count herself lucky. Another 13-year-old who killed her 35-year-old husband remains on death row despite a ruling, exactly one year ago from the West African Community Court of Justice, that her sentence is illegal because she was a minor.

Forced marriage and child marriage are also against the law here, but widely practiced.

Both girls had become second wives in the Muslim northern part of Nigeria where polygamy and child marriage is common. Neither had ever been to school and couldn’t read or write.

Prosecutors had tried to convict Tasi’u on the strength of a confession to police written in English – she speaks only Hausa – and signed with her thumbprint.

Human rights activists who crowded the court on Tuesday cheered loudly when the judge announced the state was dropping the case against Tasi’u, who is now 14. But there were also growls of disapproval from those who believe she got away with murder.

“Four people died. People are angry. They might react,” said her lawyer Ibrahim, who also feels threatened. She has championed girls’ rights for 27 years and defended Tasi’u pro bono.

Some fear the case may set a precedent for the parts of the country where polygamy and forced child marriage are common.

Traditional Muslim leaders from the rural area where Tasi’u was married are demanding 36 million naira ($170,000) in blood money for each victim, under Islamic law, Ibrahim said. They refused a counter-offer from the government of 2 million naira ($9,430) for each.

Ibrahim blames the government for the situation, noting that with no schools in the area, parents are left with no choice but to marry their daughters off young.

The girl’s deeply conservative Muslim family wants her back, but the Ibrahim fears that would just consign Tasi’u to another forced marriage. She said the parents barely visited the girl during her detention following the April 5, 2014 killings."

Previously I was in a position to spend much time with many Muslims and I found that the Devout or ultra religious Muslims agreed with things pertaining to very young woman and other things I was astonished to learn.

I also found that many of the non-devout or non-practicing Muslims had a world view more similar to mine and most other people. They were just regular good folks.

I stand by my point that a devout or "good Muslim"is dangerous to any belief outside theirs…
…While a bad or non-practicing Muslim is, for the most part, just like anyone else in the world.

 

[steve_b]

Do you know how many Muslims die in a day in those countries? Millions of Muslims are refugees. Ofcourse Muslims kill each others but there are very serious political and ethnical problems in those regions.

The point is, this carnage is at the hands of Muslims. Don’t deflect this onto politics. Those politicians are muslims also.
h:

We all must condemn these atrocities and we should help each other to solve those conflicts.

Agreed.

But where is Islam’s outrage against their own who do all this killing?

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

Return to the topic of the OP

 

[Pythons]

Eric, could I get a clarification on the acceptable reasons why American Catholics might not like certain aspects of Islamic practice? If, for instance, some of the identifiable reasons are politically incorrect and thus prohibited to mention on this forum it would be a good idea for those things to be clarified.

I wouldn’t ( nor other’s I’m sure ) would want to violate any political correctness rubrics.

Thanks