Debate Unlimited Forum

[antoninus]

I'm often amused by this term. "Moderate Islam". To me, to believe in it at all seems extreme. To me it's only as good as saying "moderate BNP". Just as ludicrous.

Does being a moderate Muslim simply mean you're not a terrorist? I don't know. Does anyone know what a moderate Muslim is?

[Wolverine]

[freedave]

I have to think that when people speak of religious moderation the are referring to a willingness to allow others to believe otherwise. Judaism, Islam and Xtianity all do poorly on this metric, some sects more than othersbut it seems to be an inevitable consequence of montheism. If your authority comes from a single God than all others must be extinguished.

[Martin Willett]

Monotheism is by its nature extreme and intolerant. Nowadays Christianity is embarrassed by this. Islam is not. Islam is proud of its intolerance. That is the problem.

[Lisa 1]

[keithprosser2]

[Lisa 1]

[antoninus]

Well, whatever the definition of "moderate" is, and however religions grew and became more or less tolerant, I still think it's hard to pin down what is meant by "moderate Islam". It's fed to us as if to suggest Islam is not threatening and is indeed tolerant to other beliefs and ways of life. But I would like to be sure it isn't people just keeping quiet.

I believe it's a dangerous term. A person who is defiantly Muslim might well describe themselves as moderate, for instance. They're certainly not going to vote against any measures that prevent Islam from becoming more dominant.

I do think the term "moderate Islam" is as ludicrous as the term "moderate BNP member", but I guess only one of those terms would be seen as ludicrous by most people.

[Potsy]

Why don't we blame every Christian for the IRA terrorism?

[andkon]

[Jenni]

[007]

Moderate islam exists in the sense that there are muslims (probably the overwhelming majority) who don't care to behead people for their beleifs. People who don't care about the odd pork sandwich or glass of wine. Or even those that do, but aren't in a position to make Islam rule the world. Church of England muslims, if you like.

Of course, true islam is violent and intolerant, as is true Christianity or judaism. Philosophically, we should oppose all such religions on these grounds. In the real world, the majority of practitioners of any religion who abhor its (even correct) use to justify violence are probably closer to being our friends than our enemies.

I would rather perpetuate the convenient myth that islam is all about peace than risk driving billions of simpletons to dig deeper and find that their religion in its fundamentalist form actually demands more of them than they currently believe.

[Clancy]

[Cloud Walker]

[Wolverine]

[Wolverine]

[philbo]

[antoninus]

Some really good points and many underlining what I've said in a different way. I think the IRA point does slightly derail the thread but not because of the religious and political thing. Because of the drastic difference in agenda and size and scale of the threat/problem/situation.

I still think "moderate" is a convenient mask myself - in the case of Islam.

My main worry is of course the erosion of freedom of speech in a country where establishment attacking humour is key to the culture. Someone I know likened it to the situation in Poland in 1938 when many people didn't know what they could or couldn't say or do for fear of being shot. Of course, not every Muslim will kill you if you say bad things about Allah, but many "moderates" will take offence.

I also wonder of all the criticism Pat Condell gets on YouTube and his website, how many are "moderates".

[Potsy]

[philbo]

[Wolverine]

[keithprosser2]

[philbo]

[keithprosser2]

The 7/7 attacks in London and more recently the attempted bombing in Times Square make it look as if such try are carried out by misguided and alienated individuals, not a well-organised word-wide conspiracy. Western thought-control has succeeded in making the exceptional Moslem fanatic stand as the 'default' for all Moslems.

Of course 99.99% of Muslims are moderate - 99.99% of them will never commit a suicide bomber or crash a plane into a skyscraper. Yet someone can doubt the existence of 'Moderate Islam'. If every Moslem was a fanatic, there would be a 9/11 or 7/7 every day.

I spend a fair fraction of my time with Moslems, but I don't know any fanatics. There is a cancer in our world that needs to be irradicated, but let's not mis-diagnose it. The cancer is a radicalised sub-set of Moslems, not Islam in general. The reasons for the growth of that cancer within Islam is not to be found in dogma - Islam hasn't changed for centuries, but the problem of Islamism did not exist even 20 years ago.

if we want to stop young Moslems killing themselves and other people, it won't do to caricature every Moslem as a religiously motivated 5th columnist, and to attack anything and everything Islamic (such as banning minarets or burqas). That is simple-minded collective punishment.

There seems to be people bent on fomenting a divide between 'us' and 'them'. To judge from the comments of some posters on DU, the manipulators of piblic opinion have succeeded in demonising the ordinary Moslem - it is not just the terrorists and bombers who are our enemy, it is all and every Moslem that is our enemy.

That is absurd, dangerous and quite frankly I find it unbelievable that supposedly intelligent people can be manipulated so easily into something like xenophobia and bigotry.

Finding a solution is harder than making it worse. Perhaps we should do more of the former, and less of the latter. Identifying the real enemy is a good first step.

[Wolverine]