Thread:For love and happiness!/@comment-30615939-20170504114328/@comment-30053934-20170522201639

AmeriskiPolskiHussar wrote: About Christians being violent, they aren't. Telling me "W-WELL MUH CRUSADES" doesn't say they're violent, that was nearly 1000 years ago, it was there time. Yes it was savage and brutal, but at the time it was a common thing that would happen. Christians eventually reformed and became peaceful Westernized people, yes they will protest about things but thats about it.

About Neo-Pagans, from what i've seen they ride segways with robes on screaming about how the Jews and Muslims need to fuck off back to where they came. I'll just say that Vikings were fucking cool looking, and had awesome mythology.

And finally, the kicker, Islam, Islam has never reformed and when you say "They should reform like Christians did" people say "WOAH HOLD ON THERE A SECOND, YOU SOME KIND OF IGNORANT RACIST?". Islam has been responsible for so many deaths in the past 10 years alone, saying "These guys don't represent all of Islam" doesn't matter to the 10's of thousands who have died to Islam. There is footage of Muslim Arabs taking Le Pen ballots and destroying them, seems suspicious doesn't it?

I've had 2 people I knew die in the US because of Islam, what did they do? Oh they just told the damn person "No, you can't do that", and the bastard killed them. Now when people send pictures of Muslims being nice, happy, and joyous and such, that small group of 10 Muslims don't equate to the massive number of violent extremists that are forcibly changing customs and ways of life across the Western World. They abuse Politically Correct thinking and come enmasse saying "I come from Syria", only to attack and threaten people.

People saying that the US is to blame for all of this trouble, don't you ever think of what President was responsible for it? Obama and Bush both went balls to the wall in the Middle East, causing so many god damn problems for everyone. And just so I can say it one more time, saying that I should read a book to cure my ignorance is actually the worst thing you can say, remember "Actions speak louder than words".

"Inb4 deleted and banned for bad thoughts" On the subject of "reform in Islam", however, in reality, to speak of a reform of christian style for islam is hypocrisy. Let us consider and analyze this idea of a "muslim Luther". Martin Luther, the reform percusser in the west, didn't confine himself to preaching 95 theses at the church door at wittenberg castle in 1517, denouncing clerical abuses within the catholic church. He also demanded that german peasants revolt against their feudal lords by inciting violence, as was the author of "on the jews and their lies" in 1543, in which he refers to the jews as "the people of the devil" and aalled on christians to destroy jewish houses and synagogues. As I can note, Luther helped establish anti-semitism as "a fundamental element of german culture and national identity." He would hardly be an ideal poster guy for the reform and modernization of muslims by 2017. The protestant reformation has also opened the doors to a bloodshed on an unprecedented scale across the european continent. Do we forget the religious wars of France? Or the english civil war? Or the tens of millions of innocents who died in europe as a result of the conflicts of the reform? About 40% of Germany's population died in the thirty years' war. Is this what we want for a muslim-majority world already plagued by sectarian conflicts, foreign occupations and the bitter legacy of colonialism, all in the name of reform, progress and even liberalism?

Islam is not christianity. The two religions are not analogous, and are deeply ignorant, not to mention paternalistic, to pretend otherwise - or try to impose a perfectly linear eurocentric view of history in a number of muslim-majority countries in Asia or Africa. Each religion has its own traditions and texts; The followers of each religion have been affected by geopolitics and socio-economic processes in a myriad of ways. The theologies of islam and christianity in particular are separate worlds: the former, for example, never had a style of catholic clerical class appointed by a "divinely chosen" pope. So, against whom would "islamic reform" be targeted? In which door would the '95 fatwas' be nailed? The truth is that Islam has already had its own religious reform, in the sense of a removal of cultural additions and a process of purported "purification of religion" as it was in Europe. And this didn't produce a pluralist, tolerant multireligious utopia, or Scandinavia-no-Euphrates. Instead, this reform produced nothing more than the kingdom of Saudi Arabia (and later ISIS itself). Was not it a religious reformation for the masses of the arabian peninsula that Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, an eighteenth-century muslim preacher and ally of the saudi family offered? He propagated an austere and clean islam of what he believed to have been "innovations," and preached rejection of centuries of analysis of islamic jurisprudence and sacred texts, as well as rejecting the traditional ulema and religious authorities he considered to be "wrong". The saudis who are criticized so much by Trump supporters and who until recently were criticized by Trump himself, who now go to Saudi Arabia, praise the country's politics, sell and supply weapons for the saudis to make their controversial acts, it seems that something is wrong...

Some may argue that if one deserves the title of "muslim Luther," this is Ibn Abdul Wahhab, who, in the eyes of his critics, combined Luther's puritanism with the subsequent political uprising of his followers with the which generated a lot of war and deaths (of course on a smaller scale). Ibn Abdul Wahhab's controversial position in islamic theology, writes by his biographer, "condemned much of islam of his own time" and led him to be branded a heretic by his own family. Don't get me wrong. Reforms are of course necessary in a majority muslim world in crisis: political, socio-economic and, yes, religious as well. Muslims need to rediscover their own heritage of pluralism, tolerance and mutual respect - embodied in, say, the letter of the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) to the monks of the saint catherine monastery in Egypt, or the "coexistence" (or coexistence) of muslim medieval Spain, or even the representation of religious minorities in government as existed in the Ottoman Empire, where each was ruled by the laws of their religion, even the head of state being a muslim. And not any doctrinal change as it has in christianity, for islam is adapted by itself to all centuries, without the need for councils or reforms of the sacred book as there was in christianity. It is clear that this movement is widely open to criticism, just as the rrotestant reformation was and still is. In my country, Egypt, for example, President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, defends islamic movements considered modern that don't break with the traditional spirituality of islam, and this is not something unique to islam, we can see in christianity as well, the rise of modern spiritual movements in various sectors of the christian faith.

What a "reform" in the muslim world doesn't need are 'lazy analysts', such as non-muslims and former muslims, who resort to a superficial, simplistic and anti-historical repetition as some of the leading western commentators on islam today. It is much easier for them, it seems, to reduce the complex debate about violent extremism to a series of clichés and slogans rather than examining historical causes or trends; Even easier for the more extreme and intolerant critics of islam, is to ignore the voices of leading muslim scholars, academics and activists. But in the end, if there is one thing that critics of islam and extremists muslims have in common, it is the habit of wanting simplistic solutions to everything they deem wrong. Ignoring or lying about the realities of the past, to try to build a utopian future based on their own conclusions and faulty interpretations.

And about other issues such as the fact that Muslims have killed many people in recent years, yes, but if we look at history those who claimed to be christians did countless gigantic atrocities against humanity, including today in countries in Africa such as Rwanda, Uganda and especially in the Central African Republic, many who claim to be christians continue to commit crimes against those who don't follow the same religious and ideological precepts as they, why they are not taken as the model for judging followers of the christian faith and extremists of ISIS and Al Qaeda are? I don't consider them christians, since they clearly demonstrate not to follow the basic principles of christian spirituality and the same goes for those who claim to be muslims and commit terrible acts against innocent people. When I say that you should read more in making statements about the islamic faith and the muslims in general, I'm trying to say that what is lacking is real understanding and understanding that is not perpetuated by slanders we hear in biased sources.

And about your claim that muslims are massively extremist, this is totally wrong, since extremists are indeed a minority among the world's islamic population. And about your comment on what happened with Le Pen ballots, besides she being a controversial character of condemnable and shameful pronouncements, it's foolish to use that as something to measure the behavior of all muslims, since radical attitudes toward politics are unfortunately the what else we see in the world.