[August]

Originally Posted by Kissaki

I was making no comparisons. Quite the contrary, I made up that example precicely because it is unfair - that was my point. Just like it's unfair to point to Iran and say, "THAT's what Islam is like", or to bring up Muslim expansion in the first millennium as a pointer to modern Islamic practices.

Muslims very often mention the Crusades as justification for all kinds of anti western activities so why isn't turnabout fair play?

What Muslim country does? Even Iran recognizes Christians' rights to practice - what is not permitted under any circumstances, though, is for Muslims to convert to something else. But that's it.

Theres more to it than that. See the plight of the Coptics and Chaldeans for two examples, then ask yourself how many Christian churches there are in Mecca. I would venture to say that whatever tolerance Christians enjoy in Muslim countries is pure tokenism.

Why are you talking about Christian nations, when I am talking about Islam? Islam is a religion, not a country. You should be talking about Christians, not Christian nations, or your parallells are invalid.

The point i was making is there are no Christian "nations", at least not anymore, on the other hand how many modern Arab and Persian nations have official state religions?

The Islam definition of "infidel", correct me if I'm wrong, is anyone not belonging to the "book" faiths, ie. any of the Judaeic religions.

Actually "Infidel" is the (rather disparaging) term for the book faiths, sort of like "******" or "goyim".

"Pagan" (translated) is how everyone else ie Hindus, Buddists etc, are referred to, and who don't enjoy any protection under Islamic law at all.

However, having friends in foreign countries are quite helpful for insight, and I'm happy to report that your views on Islam are due for a critical update. Case point: Islam has a solid foothold in parts of India, where Hinduism is dominant. An Indian friend of mine says that Hindu and Muslim neighbours get along just dandy with one another, but what's more:

Hindus are not allowed to eat cows. Muslims are not allowed to eat swine. Through cultural standards, however, they are obligated to be good guests and eat what is being served. So Hindus will go visit their Muslim friends when they feel like eating cattle, and Muslims will visit their Hindu friends when they want pork. However, bound by the aforementioned cultural standards, they are also obligated to be good hosts. So the Hindus will avoid putting pork on the menu in consideration for the Muslims, and the Muslims will avoid putting cow on the menu in consideration for the Hindus!

Oh yeah Pakistanis and Indians get along swimmingly.

But it is true that Muslims tend to get along better with non Muslims when they are in the minority, however as recent history has shown, especially in Africa, when Muslims are in the majority they tend to try to impose Islamic law on non Muslims.