WARNING: RANT ALERT AHEAD. I humbly apologise for my words, if you find them to be offencive in any manner.

I try my best to judge people by individuals, not by collectives (if you will excuse my use of this word in such a manner). As individuals, I suspect many of them are kind hearted souls who care deeply for themselves, their friends and their family. It's the few bad apples who intepret an ages-old book in the wrong manner that seem to devalue the meaning of a collective identity. To do such a thing is inexcusable, in my book. I see very strongly in terms of black and white, and these versions of black and white aren't quite the versions other people envision the world in. Either you are a individual to be loved and cared for because you are empathetic and understanding of the differences between you and me, or you are an individual wearing the blinders of misjudgment, and so, not as understanding, are not fit to survive upon this once-fair planet of ours. I am guilty of having blinders, but again, not in the manner you may find to be the average (I don't believe in the term "normal." Nothing is "normal." There is only "average" in my strict mindset, and I apologise to those whom it upsets.)

I don't care if the Americans feel that the people of the Middle East are brainwashed for our blood. I don't care if the people of the Middle East feel that the Americans need to be knocked off their pedestal in a shower of blood and glory. If you wish to fight solely because a seemingly important or influential person has told you you will be rewarded in the long run for it, you are an idiot and should be fed to the wolves. If you feel that a collective identity should be given a few very demeaning features, you'll be dessert for the wolves (though I suspect the wolves have better taste than for bad humans).

I feel that people who hate solely on criteria that would never hold up in a wise court of tribunal intelligence should be killed. But where to hide the bodies...? On the other hand, I feel that such things like race, belief and sex should not factor at all into what that person's inner being is. If Person A (a white American Christian male, for purposes of dissertation) saw Person B (an Iranian Muslim female, again for purposes of dissertation) saw Person B as less than human simply because of culture, belief, sex or colour, then Person A should be struck down by lightning and have done with it. I firmly hold the same belief if Person B thought similarly of Person A. Nobody has the right to judge based on genetics or culture. NOBODY. Not even God or Allah, nor the pantheon of Pagan or Greco-Roman deities, has that right. It is an inalienable right to be free of judgment by such narrowing, blinding standards. It is also an inalienable right to be allowed to show people who would think badly of you that you possess traits, skills, inherent genetics that mark you as standing on equal footing in comparison to them. After all, when you come down to the wire, we are all red-blooded humans, and we should not cross borders in enmity and vilification, but in empathy and kinship. We laugh, we love. We play, we care. We're all the same, under the clothing and colours and genders and beliefs.

Unfortunately for the species Homo sapiens sapiens, I happen to feel disillusioned and very strongly receptive to the fall of the species. The modern human may have been the fittest in times past, but now I see the need for a true World's Revolution. The humans have singlehandedly caused so much hate and discontent, a new creature must rise to challenge Humanity's apparent supremacy upon this fair planet of ours. I feel strongly antipathetic toward the human race as a whole, but I reiterate that I value people as the individuals they are. If an Iranian wishes to be a friend of mine, all the better for me and her/him. If s/he is constricted by blinding views that I am inferior, then I feel that person should either make an effort to remove the blinders or fall dead where they stood.

In the end, I suppose, I like people, but not collective identities. Collectives constrain free speech, the power of wisdom, the shining thing that is mutual understanding, mutual kinship. I feel somewhat like Freud on this matter, that with the exception of a select few peers, the human race is a total waste of time, money, effort and air.

Forgive me, my creator, whoever you are, for by my very definition, I have sinned grievously by viewing the collective identity known as the human race as an inferior collective identity.

I had some muslim friends when I was in college. I'm not very religious myself. Or, I guess, that's kind of a gross oversimplification... but let's run with it anyways.

They struck me as much more involved in their religion than some of the christians I knew (the i go to church every sunday, souther baptist, bible thumping types, at least). It's really a pretty big commitment to take time out of your day five times for prayer - especially a: when the first one has to happen so early in the morning and b: in a country like the US, where schedules don't take that kind of requirement into consideration at all. Now, that's not a bash on christianity - I know lots of people who were/are very sincere Christians and were great people. But hey, I also know lots of atheists/agnostics/muslims/whatever who're very nice/sincere people.

I guess what I'm getting at is that - from the perspective of someone who doesn't really believe in any religion - I appreciate all the worship that goes on in Islam. It helps build a very strong community I think, especially when that community is in the minority (as it would be in most areas of the US). I went to some meetings at a church, and one of the deacons (?) kept going on about how Islam encouraged violence/war/etc. Well... I'm no Quranic expert by any means at all, but none of the people I knew seemed impacted by that. If such things were encouraged, I'm pretty sure it was just in context of the times in which it was written - when that violence it (might have?) encouraged was crucial to the building of a better civilization. I very much doubt it encourages contemporary violence any more than the Bible (People fight/fought in the Name of Islam? Ok. Fair enough. But they certainly fought in the name of Jesus as well Historically. Currently our fights seem to be in the name of of other ... I want to say imaginary, but I'll go with Platonic ... ideas, such as Democracy.)

That's my take on Muslims/Islam and, it should be noted, is /not/ my take on the /actions/ of some Muslim /citizens/ of various states outside the US that i've never been to.

I'm not a huge fan of religion in general, especially when it's makes people do crazy things. I have the same equally negative opinion on radical Islam as I do on radical Christianity or radical Scientology. Anything that drives people to hurt eachother isn't something I'm going to approve of. If anyone can use their belief system to inspire or otherwise enrich their lives then I'm all for it regardless of what the details are, as long as they aren't making life hard for those who don't want to play. As far as I'm concerned all religious beliefs are equally absurd so I don't see the point in trying to compare them. People can do what they want. I'd just prefer they used their actions to better the state things are currently in and not play a ridiculous game of metaphysical Teacher's Pet where people die for not tying their shoes right.


Unfortunately that's rarely the case.

...Honestly, I'm almost offended by this post. I don't think that you can judge a religion, or a group of people by their religion. Sounds stupid coming from me, uber athiest, especially when you know some of the things I've said in other threads, but to my mind, that's different. I've mocked the actions of a small group of dedicated and, in my opinion misguided, people who take the least savory aspects of an ancient book that's been rewritten thousands of times and use it to feel superior to society as a whole. I don't mock or judge the vast majority of Christians or Jews because there's just no point to doing that. It's rude, it's improper, and it's less then intelligent.

Islam as a whole, is just another belief structure creatred by a group of people responding to the world around them, and what they perceive as miracles and holy truths. I don't feel any differently towards them then I do towards any religion. To my eyes, Islam is on equal footing with Christianity, with Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, all that. It's a set of beliefs, traditions, and ritual designed to help a person cope with, and get through, life. If anything, I can identify a little bit with the nature of Buddhism. I think it's simple, which is one of the best things to be. It's also adaptable, which I feel that other religions would have the potential to be, if only some of their followers would just die.

And why judge a person based on their religion? And why a religion that, sadly, gets a lot of negative press, especially in the west? A religion, unless you're pretty dedicated, is only a facet of a person as a whole. To judge a diamond based on one facet is ludicrous, and the idea of basing a person on one quality, equally so. I'm a bitch first thing in the morning. Doesn't mean I'm a bitch all the time. It's like that -a person isn't really a 24 hour anything. I adore Shattered, despite the fact that I find some members of his religion questionable. Why should I change my judgement or feelings towards someone based on the actions of another person who happen to be only loosely associated? For that matter, why should I base my opinions of Christians solely on Shattered, who happens to be about the only church-going person I know? Should I think that all christians are super-open, sexy, wonderful people who will listen to me blag on for an hour about stupid, stupid emo crap? No, because not all people will.

And how can you judge a culture that you don't know? How can you say that something is right or wrong about a religion when you don't experience that culture or religion? How can you create an opinion on something that you just don't experience? It seems like such a misguided thought process that all woman who wear a veil are dominated. I can respect a woman who chooses to identify so much with her religion that she swaths herself from head to foot -it's not easy. Or chooses to always wear a veil. If your religion means that much to you, then by all means, more power to you. And by the same token, it's like judging Menonites or Amish, based on the fact that they eschew modern conviniences. It's just an aspect of a belief, something that they hold to be true. Sure, the extremists are kinda' nuts. I take offense to the sensabilities that say when a girl has been raped by her brothers you should stone the girl to save the family honor. But do all Muslims stone daughters who have the bad luck to get raped? I take offense to the Chick tracts. I take offense to the actions of the Israel military in treating Palistineans like second class people. I take offense to the people that turned an aspect of Hinduism into a crazed, moneymaking cult. Does that mean all things Christian, or Jewish, of Hindu offend me? No, and it would be stupid to be offended by those religions as a whole.

People achieve so much in a lifetime. Why make assessments about them based on what they believe goes on in the sky? It seems so demeaning.

I think it's sad how Mahamud spread a message of peace and being a good person, but once he died people took that message and killed eachother for hundreds of years. x_x Religions really need to stop doing that. (I'm religious, but still.)

morosemocha wrote:

I adore Shattered, despite the fact that I find some members of his religion questionable. Why should I change my judgement or feelings towards someone based on the actions of another person who happen to be only loosely associated? For that matter, why should I base my opinions of Christians solely on Shattered, who happens to be about the only church-going person I know? Should I think that all christians are super-open, sexy, wonderful people who will listen to me blag on for an hour about stupid, stupid emo crap? No, because not all people will.

You, my dear, are too kind, but it still makes me feel loved to read this. You do, however, make an excellent point. Many (if not the majority) of the followers of any given religion don't let it define them but rather consider it a part of their identity. As such you can't assume that all followers of a religion are the same. I really do like to think of myself as different from the people who publish the Chick tracts and the people who hand them out, and it's nice to have that reinforced.

I can't for the life of me remember this quote, but I like it: "As long as there has been one true God, there has been killing in his name."

Okay cool, I was just wondering, because I live in England and I'm a female muslim and I think there's been way too much bad press and I know that all the people on here are pretty mature (when it's called for!) and generally intelligent, so I thought it would be interesting to see what all your views were! I did consider putting this up earlier but back then I still wasn't sure if it descend into a giant flame war or not. But yay, it hasn't so far so great!

Lady Nilamarthiel wrote:

To me, it's just another religion. It's a lot like asking what I think of Christians and Jews and Buddhists. Just people with different belief systems.

This is similar to the way I see it.  It doesn't matter to me what religion somebody is, and they are free to practice or not practice whatever belief system they wish.  If they want to educate me about it if it's one I don't know about, that's great too.  But imposing one's religion on another without consent is where I draw the line.  In other words, trying to convert is a big no-no as far as I am concerned.

I was raised a Congregational, but I no longer practice, but I'm not really an atheist either.  I have beliefs but no particular religion really matches them.  Shinto probably comes the closest (when I was a kid I even treated toys and gadgets and things as if they had 'feelings', which is similar to the concept of kami in Shinto), but not being a native Japanese, it's kind of hard to investigate it any further, since the nearest shrine is probably thousands of miles away from me.

So yeah, while I don't personally know anyone who practices Islam, I wouldn't think any different of someone who was if I hadn't previously known.

Last edited by Imaginary Bad Bug (04-19-2007 03:04:38 PM)

Giovanna wrote:

I'm quite sure any religion in the right conditions will breed exactly the kind of fundamentalists you see in it. It's a pity, for the same reason asshole-style athiests tend to assume all Christians are the fucking maniacs that run Jesus Camp, the bad apples are ruining it for the tons of rational Muslims that are actually enriched by their religion. It's a shame.

WORD. Seriously, that was delightfully eloquent and summed up my thoughts nicely. Thanks, Giovanna.

As a religion, I dislike Islam for the same reasons I dislike Christianity - it's a organized dogmatic religion relying more on holy writ than common sense. However, to assume that Islam automatically leads to theocratic fundamentalist dictatorships is simply stupid - various versions of those have been the norm both in East and West for most of the planet's history. Back in the Middle Ages the Muslim countries were the pinnacles of civilization compared to Europe - it still baffles me that many modern Christians simply refuse to accept this little fact, along with that religious and women's rights used to be actually better in the Arab Empire (not sure about the Ottomans, though).

As for Muslims, themselves, my opinion is exactly the same as with the Christians - if you're one, fine, but I really don't need to hear about it. Civilized people can discuss without bringing articles of faith in the conversation, when logic fails. Muslims who live in the Western countries actually tend to be better at this than the Christians, for obvious reasons. Those living in the Middle East, not so much, if the media is to believe - no personal experience, no personal opinion.

Stormcrow wrote:

And yes, historical Muslim artwork is very beautiful.  If I recall correctly, there was some manner of religious injunction against depicting living things in art, so the geometric figures kind of followed from there.

I am sincerely sorry if I've offended anyone.

That is a myth as there are many pictures depicting people and animals, the prohibition only goes to religious imagery as is not good seen trying to portray god as a person

Stormcrow wrote:

Ah, thank you for your correction.  It may still be related, though.  Consider how much European artwork is religious in character.  Then again, I could be way off base here, art history isn't something I know very much about.

Religious art history served more for "ecucational" purposes, as most believers didn't know how to read and anyways reading of the bibble was forbiden so christian imagery was made to teach the masses about "key" passages in the bibble (Also so they wouldn't get bored seeing the pretty pictures"

The illiteration of the masses was not coincidence, also the ban on reading the bibble, if the believer read the bibble would notice the catholic church was acting like they should and would be less gullibe... sad isn't it. On the other side good muslims are expected to be able to recite Coran passages by heart...

Also this morning I knew my Renacentism art teacher died some weeks ago she was such a wonderful teacher even if I just had one semester with her...

Last edited by Romanticide (04-25-2007 03:08:18 PM)