The future of europe?/Islam threads (Merged)

[scandium]

Originally Posted by Skybird

You evade and distract. Not wanting to answer a question that you cannot answer in a way that pleases your previously stated opinion, you declare it to be "not relevant".

That Islam is historically acting in correspondence with it's founder's intention and commandments, whereas socalled "Christians" (or should I say "Churchianists"?) do not, is not relevant. And that violance in Jesus teachings is not allowed and accepted (and never was practiced neither by Jesus, nor by anyone who seriously was in his following), but in Muhammad's teachings is explicitly demanded, is not relevant. And that Jesus teachings were misinterpreted - I say: ursurped - by the church, whereas the teachings of Muhammad are not abused, but simply practiced to the word: not relevant.



Your indifference is absurd. I see no reason to continue when someone tells me that a historical figure is said to be of zero interest and that all and everything can be taken and twisted just to justify all and everything. That is complete intellectual nihilism: the complete absence of scales for comparing, category, evaluation, value. This is the politics I see at work in the EU, and this is the reason why the West is going down the drain: indifference, and unlimited tolerance on the basis of rejecting any qualities and scales that differ between what is to be tolerated, and what not. This is the total rejection of personal identity, this is anarchy, and I see your understanding of history as anarchic, too.

Forms need borders that define them, else all you have is an empty void.

I guess I don't see ideas as being themselves inherently dangerous. To borrow from the NRA: ideas don't kill people, people kill people. And in that vain, Islam isn't killing people and nor are the 1.2 billion people who practice it. Rather there are a very few people, out of these 1.2 billion, who have taken this religion and used it to fit their own ends and to recruit others of like mind to their cause. We have a name for them already, and its terrorists, not Islamists. And terrorism isn't the exclusive domain of Islam.

On a bit of a side track, if Islam is so dangerous, why was there such scant attention paid to it until recently? Not because of terrorism, that is nothing new. Not because of the theocracies in the middle east, they are nothing new either. Does it not strike you as odd that there always has to be a boogeyman to hate, to fear, and to conquer? Islam seems to have come into the spotlight right around the time the USSR had fully collapsed. So yesterday the godless Commies, today the Islamo-fascists, and tomorrow it'll be the godless Chinese.

Although at least the USSR was a well-defined nation state and not a religion practiced by 1.2 billion geographically diverse people. That is probably about as good as you could hope for a shadowy boogeyman.