Hi Billy, On Mar 8, 2010, at 12:18 PM, [email protected] wrote: > There also is this whopper : "no religion condones, let alone approves, > bloodshed."
If you're going to take him to task for misrepresenting Islam, it might be nice if you were as scrupulous in representing what *he* said, which was something quite different: > To say that any religion, let alone Islam, can condone or approve killing of > innocent bystanders is not only ridiculous but also a lie that has already > had catastrophic consequences for humanity. > I agree, Islam has no problem with killing apostates, atheists, or anyone who is perceived as a threat to Islamic society. It offers no guarantees of religious freedom. But the author is correct, it doesn't condone killing innocent bystanders (even if it is perhaps less strict than we about what is "innocent"). > How can anyone who is informed not understand exactly this ? Because we have not yet found the radical center on this issue. The debate is currently clouded between those who claim Islam is a religion of piece, and those who insist that every Muslim is a potential terrorist and that the only solution is to eradicate Islam entirely (at whatever cost). To that extent, I think the author is right: > No limits seem to have been respected in the exercise of intelligence and > intellect in defining the ‘enemy’. With dehumanization of faceless > terrorists, many a legitimate freedom struggle and a whole faith professed by > no less than 1.5 billion people have been condemned. Of course there are far more subtle, intelligent, and rational critiques of Islam than that. But what you don't seem to recognize (or mind), is that such extremists reactions do exist, and actually hinder a honest critique by poisoning the debate. -- Ernie P.
_______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected] http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/
