Topic: Why do people hate islam? - page 47. (Read 221077 times)

Most muslims don't consider IS or Al Q et al Islamic, why should anyone else?

Sounds like EXACTLY the justification method by which Bin Laden advocated terrorism toward the West.

Now let's see.  Do you agree with Sayyad Qutb's views?

People hating other people for beliefs alone is something that eludes me, and will always do so. If I believe in something, in anything at all, why should I care what the rest of the world believes? Even more so, when that belief it attached to spiritual ties. Think about it. Why do religions even want to convert more people? Is some contest running that no one informed me about? Will god, any god, open the gates only once a certain number of followers is reached?

How can we not think straight?

Now read the teachings of Islam about War: -


The teaching of Islam is different from both these teachings. It strikes a mean between the two. Islam does not teach aggression as did Moses. Nor does it, like present-day (and presumably corrupt) Christianity, preach a contradiction. It does not ask us to turn the other cheek and at the same time to sell our clothes to buy a sword. The teaching of Islam fits into the natural instincts of man, and promotes peace in the only possible way.

Islam forbids aggression, but it urges us to fight if failure to fight jeopardizes peace and promotes war. If failure to fight means the extirpation of free belief and of the search of truth, it is our duty to fight. This is the teaching on which peace can ultimately be built, and this is the teaching on which the Prophet based his own policies and his practice. The Prophet suffered continuously and consistently at Mecca but did not fight the aggression of which he was an innocent victim. When he escaped to Medina, the enemy was out to extirpate Islam; it was, therefore, necessary to fight the enemy in defense of truth and freedom of belief.

We quote below the passages in the Quran which bear on the subject of war.

(1)   In 22:40-42 we have:

    Permission to fight is given to those against whom war is made, because they have been wronged-and Allah indeed has power to help them-Those who have been driven out from their homes unjustly only because they said, "Our Lord is Allah"-And if Allah did not repel some men by means of others, there would surely have been pulled down cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques, wherein the name of Allah is oft commemorated. And Allah will surely help one who helps Him. Allah is indeed Powerful, Mighty.-Those who, if We establish them in the earth, will observe Prayer and pay the Zakat and enjoin good and forbid evil. And with Allah rests the final issue of all affairs.

The verse purports to say that permission to fight is given to the victims of aggression. God is well able to help the victims-those who have been driven out of their homes because of their beliefs. The permission is wise because, if God were not to repel the cruel with the help of the righteous, there would be no freedom of faith and worship in the world. God must help those who help to establish freedom of worship. It follows that fighting is permitted when a people have suffered long from wanton aggression-when the aggressor has had no cause for aggression and he seeks to interfere with the religion of his victim. The duty of the victim, if and when he attains to power, is to establish religious freedom and to protect all religions and all religious places. His power is to be used not for his own glorification, but for the care of the poor, the progress of the country and the general promotion of peace. This teaching is as unexceptionable as it is clear and precise. It proclaims the fact that early Muslims took to war because they were constrained to do so. Aggressive wars were forbidden by Islam. Muslims are promised political power, but are warned that this power must be used not for self-aggrandizement, but for the amelioration of the poor and the promotion of peace and progress.

(2)   In (2:191-194) we have:

    And fight in the cause of Allah against those who fight against you, but do not transgress. Surely, Allah loves not transgressors. And kill them wherever you meet them and drive them out from where they have driven you out; for persecution is worse than killing. And fight them not in, and near, the Sacred Mosque until they fight you, then fight them: such is the requital for the disbelievers. But if they desist, then surely Allah is Most Forgiving, Merciful. And fight them until there is no persecution, and religion is professed for Allah. But if they desist, then remember that no hostility is allowed except against the aggressors.

Fighting is to be for the sake of God, not for our own sake or out of anger or aggrandizement, and even fighting is to be free from excesses, for excesses are displeasing to God. Fighting is between parties of combatants. Assaults on individuals are forbidden. Aggression against a religion is to be met by active resistance, for such aggression is worse than bloodshed. Muslims are not to fight near the Sacred Mosque, unless an attack is first made by the enemy. Fighting near the Sacred Mosque interferes with the public right of pilgrimage. But if the enemy attacks, Muslims are free to reply, this being the just reward of aggression. But if the enemy desists, Muslims must desist also, and forgive and forget the past. Fighting is to continue so long as religious persecution lasts and religious freedom is not established. Religion is for God. The use of force or pressure in religion is wrong. If the Kafirs desist from it and make religion free, Muslims are to desist from fighting the Kafirs. Arms are to be taken up against those who commit excesses. When excesses cease, fighting must cease also.

If Jihad, is the only reason for peoples who hate Islam, then here are some teachings of different faiths about War.


... The question ... arises - Can it ever be right to fight for a faith? Let us, therefore, turn to this question.

The teaching of religion on the subject of war takes different forms... Moses is commanded to enter the land of Canaan by force, to defeat its population and to settle his own people in it (Deut. 20:10-18). In spite of this teaching in the Book of Moses, and in spite of its reinforcement by practical example of the Prophets Joshua, David and others, Jews and Christians continue to hold their Prophets in reverence and to regard their books as the Books of God.

At the end of the Mosaic tradition, we had Jesus who taught;

    But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also (Matthew 5-39).

Christians have often cited this teaching of Jesus and argued that Jesus preached against war. But in the New Testament, we have passages which purport to teach quite the opposite. One passage, for instance, says:

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword (Matthew 10:34).

And another passage says:

    Then said he unto them. But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one (Luke 22:36).

Of the three verses the last two contradict the first. If Jesus came for war, why did he teach about turning the other cheek? It seems we have either to admit a contradiction in the New Testament, or we have to explain one of the contradictory teachings in a suitable manner. We are not concerned here with the question whether turning the other cheek can ever be practicable. We are concerned only to point out that, throughout their long history, no Christian people have ever hesitated to make war. When Christians first attained to power in Rome, they took part in wars both defensive and aggressive. They are dominant powers in the world today, and they continue to take part in wars both defensive and aggressive. Only now the side which wins is canonized by the rest of the Christian world. Their victory is said to be the victory of Christian civilization. Christian civilization has come to mean whatever tends to be dominant and successful. When two Christian powers go to war, each claims to be the protector of Christian ideals. The power which wins is canonized as the true Christian power. It is true, however, that from the time of Jesus to our time, Christendom has been involved-and indications are that it will continue to remain involved-in war. The practical verdict of the Christian peoples, therefore, is that war is the real teaching of the New Testament, and that turning the other cheek was either an opportunist teaching dictated by the helplessness of early Christians, or it is meant to apply only to individuals, not to States and peoples.

Secondly, even if we assume that Jesus taught peace and not war, it does not follow that those who do not act upon this teaching are not holy and honored. For Christendom has ever revered exponents of war such as Moses, Joshua and David. Not only this, the Church itself has canonized national heroes who suffered in wars. They were made saints by the Popes.

I am conscious of the fact that, strictly speaking, the word 'terrorism' applies to acts of terror, attempts to cause bomb explosions, and so on. But I do not believe that this is the only type of terrorism the world is suffering from. I believe that whenever repressive measures are taken by governments against their own countrymen to still the voice of disagreement, those measures too should be included within the term 'terrorism' and be as strongly and roundly condemned as any other form of terrorism. I consider all oppressive measures taken by governments against the left or right within their own countries as terrorism of the worst type. When acts of terrorism are directed against foreign governments and take the form of the use of explosives here and there, or the hijacking of planes, such events gain a great deal of attention. World opinion sympathizes with the victims of such callous terrorist acts, as indeed it should. Such sympathies are not merely voiced, but are generally followed by constructive means to prevent and pre-empt such attempts in the future. However, what about those hundreds of thousands of people suffering under the stem and merciless hands of their own governments? Their cries of anguish are seldom heard outside. Their cries of protest are very often muffled by the application of strict measures of censorship. Even if philanthropic agencies like Amnesty International draw the attention of the world to such cruel acts of persecution, torture, and denial of human rights, such events are only mildly condemned, if at all, by world governments. More often than not, these are considered to be internal matters for the countries concerned. Instead of being described as acts of terrorism, they are widely mentioned as government efforts to suppress terrorism in these countries, and to establish peace, law and order.

I am quite convinced that in essence all restrictive and punitive measures taken by a government against its own people to suppress a popular movement or suspected opposition, more often than not, go beyond the limits of genuine legal measures and end up as brutal acts of violence designed to strike terror in the hearts of a dissatisfied section of their own people. Humanity has suffered far more through such acts of State terrorism than through all acts of sabotage or hijacking put together As far as Islam is concerned, it categorically rejects and condemns every form of terrorism. It does not provide any cover or justification for any act of violence, be it committed by an individual, a group or a government.

Odd.  In the US we know for a fact that it is the left wing that controls the media.

So how do you get this point of view?

I dont hate islam.
Islam is a fantastic religion but i dont follow it, the problem is the conservative and other right wing parties that control the media want us to hate it. they position us to hate it.

Was Yassir Araft a good Muslim?

Was Bin Laden a good Muslim?

How about Sayyad Qutb?

Is it okay to spread hate about the Jews?

If already spread terror, it is wrong. In any religion always teach about love, including also present in Islam. And I don't see people hate islam,  but hated those are the people who in the name of Islam in spreading terror.

To see why people hate Islam, look at what the Islamic writings tell them to do - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13565183. Most people who are in a free country aren't forced by Islam. The Muslims in predominantly Islamic countries can't say that they don't like Islam for fear of being punished or executed.

Tsk, Tsk. Your Decksperiment is starting to come out.   

I don't know why people do hate Islam, maybe it's a fact that they like their own religion very much. And wants to make it grow big. As Islam is now a days growing in very big numbers and population of the world is increasing too much because of it.

Because he never learned anything in school. You can tell by the way he rights...  ... I mean writes.

Never had a chance at an education ..
But considering i never spent much time in education i seem to know way more about life than you will ever know..
Because what the fuck did they teach you in school you inbred religious bum..
i bet your a tramp who reads the bible upside down..
because what you read is not what every body else is reading you dumb shit..
OH I FORGOT GOD SENT YOU TO SPREAD THE WORD..
YOU FUCKIN NUTTER
YOU SAID YOU WHERE SENT BY GOD
YOUR FUCKIN THE CUNT THAT YOU COME OUT OF
 YOU ARE YOUR MOTHERS BROTHERS SON
FUCKIN BACKWARD TWAT..
I WILL DO A DANCE SO YOU GET RUN OVER YOU FUCKIN CUNT
SOMEONE NEED TO KICK SOME SENSE INTO YOUR STUPID THICK CUNT OF A BRAIN..
I HAVE NEVER HEARD SO MUCH SHIT COME OUT OF SOMEONES MOUTH

BADECKER IS A TOTAL PLANT POT
WITH A BIT OF LUCK YOU WILL GET YOUR WISH SOON WHEN A BUS RUNS OVER YOUR FUCKIN HEAD..SO KEEP PRAYING FOR HEAVEN TWAT..BECAUSE I HOPE YOU GET CANCER CUNT..

LOL! ^^   

I will never be poor because i am to scared to be 
And to good at my job . And i am not a lazy person..

My kids will never hate me because they know how much i care for them and love them so much
YOU FUCKIN NUTTER
MORE BRAINS IN A PEA YOU THICK SHIT 
The bullshit you vomit gets better every day..
And BADECKER...WOW WOW WOW HE AS GONE NUTS

That's right. Most of Islam doesn't follow what their holy books say. Throw the books out, and Islam wouldn't change much. You would still have as many different ideas about Islam as you do today.

Muslims that the media labels as terrorists are the Muslims who are following the religious books better than most any of the other Muslims.

It is only done by a handful of people or organization such as ISIS which translates Islam as a religion that is creepy, and therefore we must be wise in dealing with hate against Islam.

Then again, it could be because of the high amount of total nonsense generated by believers in Islam.  For example, the fact they are Anti-Vaccination.

And if you are a Muslim, how do you stop vaccinations?  You suicide bomb vaccination clinics, of course.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/13/bomb-attack-at-polio-vaccination-centre-kills-14-in-pakistani-city-of-quetta

Yep. He can be kinda forceful at times.

"Knowledge without thought is useless;
Thought without knowledge is dangerous."

I wonder what you get when you add lunacy to the mix.