Muhammad is No 2 in boy's names
 

I guess we're looking at a future London-Abad.

Muhammad is now second only to Jack as the most popular name for baby boys in Britain and is likely to rise to No 1 by next year, a study by The Times has found. The name, if all 14 different spellings are included, was shared by 5,991 newborn boys last year, beating Thomas into third place, followed by Joshua and Oliver.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle1890354.ece

And...? Lots of Muslims naming their child the same name. I don't see anything wrong with that.

Nor me.

Overall, Muslims account for 3 per cent of the British population, about 1.5 million people. However, the Muslim birthrate is roughly three times higher than the nonMuslim one.

Just news. The British will have to determine what it means.

I hate to say this Wastegate, but this all seem a bit Islamaphobic to me. Maybe I'm overreacting but I just don't get your point. Unless you're just having a dig at Muslims. I really don't care who's having babies, or indeed who's Muslim and who isn't , because we are all ENGLISH and that's what matters

Congrats to all those proud new parents :up:

I have a few Muslim friends myself. There are good and bad Muslims, Christians, Jews, etc. It did strike me as a bit "Islamophobic" as well.

I didn't write the arcticle or make any value judgement I am merely passing it along.

This acticle appeared one year ago.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...e1893879.shtml

I was questioning your motivation for passing it along. How would a British Muslim feel reading something like this?

How do you know that I'm not a Muslim myself?

The majority of Muslims in this country are good respectible people, I have lots as friends and I'm sorry but this kind of thing really annoys me.

Whoa, do I see this correctly?

Are people actually backing muslims in this thread?!

this is a first for subsim!

whoooooooohooo

Nincompoop! no one makes a political post with out making some sort of statement, even if its one we have to read between the lines to find and we don't need to read far in to your post to see what you are saying.

I would be no more concerned about a UK with a 50% muslim population than I am about the UK with a 50% female population!
The idea that the UK should attempt to keep as much of its population as white people with christian names is both absurd and dangerous.

I for one would like to welcome all the young or newly arrived mohammed's to our fine country!

I guess my motivation was the free distribution of information. I hope that wasn't the part that annoyed you. While we are on the subject of annoyance, do you think that I am not annoyed by many things? Life is 10%, what happens and 90%, how you react.

One can only be annoyed if they let themselvese be annoyed.

No news is "just news." Behind this news is a statement you are trying to make (as Letum said). There is a reason you posted this article, and your bias clearly seeps through in only two posts.

I for one could do without that kind of information.

Perhaps the comments say more about yourselves than it does about my post.:hmm:

There is very much to critizise and question in Islam, but trying to set it up as an issue in this way is a bit stereotypic and premature - as is to reply with the old argument of "I know a Muslkim guy living on the same floor like me, and he is okay." If the public debate on Islam remains on this uneducated level, than all hope is lost.

It is neither about first names, nor about guys living on the same floor, it is about the content of an ideology. This has to be academically analysed and compared to history (if history violates the content of the teachings or not, and what Islam brought to the nations and people). And the outcome of this unbiased analysis is what decides the verdict on Islam.

I do not write another long essay here. I only tell you that the violance and many wars are not caused by violating Muhammad's teachings, but by following Muhammad's teachings, which should tell people all important that is to be known about it. And there ain't no other Islam than Muhammad's. Islamism, fanatism, fundamentalism, extremism - all that are self-deceptions and inventions of western minds who desperately try to define true Islam in a way that they can tame it with their limited verbal means- they do not want to accept the brutal reality, and prefer the illusion that they can "manage" it.

Now
1. check Muhammad's biography, by that
2. understand the character behind that name and see
3. his motivation why he said what the Quran claims that he has said. And then
4. determine if this queer and brutal self-justification of a notorious mobster can be the origin of a teaching of peace, tolerance and freedom.

That man have ordered dozens of wars, has slaughtered with his own hands, has blackmailed, has given assassination orders, and commited genocide. Now ask yourself why a guy like for example Hitler never was considered to be a candidate for the peace nobel prize - or why Muhammad in no way can be comapred to guys like Siddharta, Ghandi, or Jesus.

Judging the man by his deeds and queer teachings, Muhammad was the total anti-thesis to what Jesus, Ghandi and buddha were teaching. In plain english: he was a narcistic and unscrupelous gangster suffering from epilepsy, who abused a "religion" he invented himself as an excuse for self-justification on behalf of his brutal crimes that illustrated his magelomania. Islam is just the superstitious cult made around a criminal. End of message. where he was foistering social "reforms", they came at the price of all that were not with him, and the cost of women in general, and their major use was to attract others to his leadership.

Possible that that kind guy that you know to live on your floor simply does not wish to see that, maybe honstely does not know that since he never read a book on Islam that was different from the Quran (trying educational sources and seeking answers to existential questions outside the Quran is according to the Sharia forbidden by death penalty), or he rfuses to analyse it for it would question his complete world model and view on life. After WWII, many Germans also did not want to realuze the cruel truth of what has happened ion the KZs. That'S why some Allied commanders ordered local residents to go there and helpt to bury the dead. You do not do Muslims a favbour if you time and again give them the chance to sneak away from questioning their socalled faith, and if you never confront them with some undeniable hostorical facts and truths. If ou always allow Islam'S people to evade any critical questions - how could you seriously expect then, that Islam will ever chnage and adapt to other cultures? Becasue what they learn from your unlimzrted tolerance is: we get away with it, so why should be change?

You cannot tame Islam.

OK, WG, I shall play along with you a little. How about you enlighten us as to your 'real' oppinion on the news item?

What do you think, or what would you think where you British?


*edit*
Or perhaps they say more of our expectations based on your formerly expressed views. :hmm:

Heh, like what? That we don't have a preconcieved notion about followers of Islam?

Or that we're not Islamaphobic?

I'm islamaphobic. :gulp: