Skybird |
03-27-06 06:22 PM |
I have commented often enough on the Qu'Ran, on it's history and the reasons that influenced it's present shape. I see no reason why I should change my opinion on it. If you people think that the Qu'ran is a modern, progressive book and will lead you to a better society, then you do not deserve it any better. But your ancestors who suffered for such a state of life being overcome, will turn in their graves.
Once again I say: there is no difference between fundamental and "real" Islam (I have explained where the misleading perception of the West, that this separation does exist, has come from, around one hundred years ago during the local rebellion against the Imperial powers in North-West-Africa). There is only one Islam - and that is the fighting Islam. there never has been a non_fighting Islam, nor is such an Islam descriobed in the Qu'ran or Hadith. It is a militant, intolerant ideology, driven by it's sense to be superior and having the mission to kill or convert5 anything non-Islamic, designed to justify conquest, and excusing intolerance by terms of a self-made, highly narcist cult that repalces culture and religion. It'S social ideal is a totalitarian society in which the single individual is nothing, the state/religion/community is all. Coexistence is unacceptable. attack is needed to delete coexistence, and to gain new ressources (remember, Muhammad was a predatory beduin in the first, who nevertheless wanted not to be called a bandit: thus his maneuvering into the religious feild where his demands could no longer be touched withoiut beeing called a heresy) If you do not realize this, if you think you must put it into more tolerant relations and approach it with reason and logic (Western style), then you are doomed to fall.
Our ancestors considered it to be modern to develope (under immense pains) beyond the unity of state and religion, that's why we have secular states in which both is kept separate. Qu'Ran preaches exactly the opposite, and not only that, no it preaches a religion of superstitious immitation only: immitation of virtual Muhammad that in that kind and form as he is described by Islam never has existed. How can educated Europeans consider an ideology to be progressive - if it leads them back to their violant past? In school you have learned why you should consider it as progressive, that these cruel, dark times of non-separation between religion and politics had been overcome.
Muslim societies have seen standstill in philosophy, sciences, theology, state theory, since centuries, social system and education since over thousand years. they are helpless agisnt there own tyrantsa, because these tyrants necessarily must be raised and supported by the system of politics and religion in one hand. The Western raise of all these virtues and developements, plus the canon of the typical Western values, Islam cannot compensate by any developement like that in it's own sphere. It works by only one simple mechanism: demanding what it wants, and when it does not get it, using force to take it, or saying it want's it because that is it's religion and Allah is demanding it like that. Intimidation and discrimination are part of the agenda. Critical questions get answered explicitly: with a sharp knife. when there are no questions anymore, then there is peace made in Islam. Cannot get more primitive like that. You better should be more careful what lecture you would call "progressive", guys.
again, there are several essay I have written on all this. Details there.
|