Islam: Our Partners in Peace...

[markw]

The middle ages sucked, no matter who was in charge, but that's hundreds of years ago. Even then, your postulation that living under the yoke of foreigners who took over by force and being ruled by "benevolent rulers" being preferable to not is highly questionable.

As for today, simply look around you. I cannot think of any country that is under muslim control as being any place for a non-muslim or a woman to live safely. As for the punishments I state, while perhaps not 100% accurate, are pretty close.

Do you get the meaning of "dhimmi"(sp). That is essentially a second-class citizen who has to pay for safety and still has to follow sharia law. Is that what you or your progeny to be, or are you willing to convert?

Look carefully at the population stats for Europe and you'll see that, just like Mexico is doing here, they're being invaded by immigration and reproduction, a foreign influence is slowly taking over.

Read this link and then you tell me that it's not something to be carefully monitored. There is no negotiation involved. When a majority can, it will apply it's laws.

I have five grand-kids and would like them (and their grand-kids) to live their lives with the same rights we were born with and in the same country in which they were born.

Of course, if you don't mind your grand-kids living under sharia law, then that's your choice.

[Worf101]

The middle ages sucked, no matter who was in charge, but that's hundreds of years ago. Even then, your postulation that living under the yoke of foreigners who took over by force and being ruled by "benevolent rulers" being preferable to not is highly questionable.

As for today, simply look around you. I cannot think of any country that is under muslim control as being any place for a non-muslim or a woman to live safely. As for the punishments I state, while perhaps not 100% accurate, are pretty close.

Do you get the meaning of "dhimmi"(sp). That is essentially a second-class citizen who has to pay for safety and still has to follow sharia law. Is that what you or your progeny to be, or are you willing to convert?

Look carefully at the population stats for Europe and you'll see that, just like Mexico is doing here, they're being invaded by immigration and reproduction, a foreign influence is slowly taking over.

Read this link and then you tell me that it's not something to be carefully monitored. There is no negotiation involved. When a majority can, it will apply it's laws.

I have five grand-kids and would like them (and their grand-kids) to live their lives with the same rights we were born with and in the same country in which they were born.

Of course, if you don't mind your grand-kids living under sharia law, then that's your choice.

Mark, while I understand and even share some of your concerns (I'd want myself nor my loved ones anywhere near Sharia Law) I'm not as alarmed by Islam's rise as you. There are several reasons for Islam's rise and popularity of Sharia law, particularly in the 3rd world.

1. Sharia law is while considered harsh and draconian is at least 'fair". That's its major appeal in the 3rd world. Most "governments" in the 3rd world are so corrupt there's not even a hint of "justice" in the room, just the stench of abuse, patronage and graft. Muslims in the hills come down and say, hey, while we might flog you, behead you ror stone you, the law is inviolate, incorruptable and applied equally (such as it is). Until the west or their home societies can give them something "better" Islam and Sharia Law will continue to attract converts.

2. Lets face facts, White, Christian Westerners ain't having enough goddamn kids. Simple as that. England may be drowning in Muslims but it ain't their fault that they keep having kids and Lord Fortesque's line has died out like Bobby Browns recording career. You want to hold on to your country's ideals, culture and political bent? Well you better start having some kids then. You can't hold an empire from the grave man!!!! And it appears that many of the kids today don't seem to share the same jingoistic xenophobia as their parents soooo. You do the math.

Da Worfster

[markw]

Dude, I've got three grown boys and five grand-kids so far. I've done my share and I really would like to wait a while before starting on great-grand-kids since the oldest grand-daughter is 14.

And, while I hear you, I don't think color or religion has anything to do with it. I know many black Christians and various non-Christians of various colors as well who are aware of this situation as well.

There's a great video on exactly what you're saying on this somewhere and I'll try to dig it up. I think the magic number is 1.9. When i find it, I'll post it.

[edit] found it!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/oqpn-FpFnuM&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/oqpn-FpFnuM&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[nightflier]

...your postulation that living under the yoke of European colonialists who took over by force and being ruled by "benevolent rulers" being preferable to not is highly questionable.

...I cannot think of any white-male dominated country that is under Christian and Western economic control as being any place for a non-Christian or a woman to live safely....

Do you get the meaning of a new immigrant from the Middle East in a Western Country? That is essentially a second-class citizen who has to pay for safety and still has to follow Christian law that is geared towards profit rather than welfare....

Look carefully at the population stats for the Middle East and you'll see that, just like the US was doing in its own country, and then in the Phillipines and Latin America, the Middle East was being invaded by colonialists, and a foreign influence was slowly taking over.

Read ...(references too many to list) and then you tell me that colonial hegemony is not something to be carefully monitored. There is no negotiation involved. When a Christian and colonial power can, it will apply it's own laws.

...

Of course, if you don't mind your grand-kids living under Christian profit-motivated laws that don't guaranty their welfare, then that's your choice.

Pot, meet kettle.

And while I don't disagree with you, and I share the Western perspective that punishment in Sharia Law countries is inhumane, the people who live in those societies (yes, even women) don't all share all our criticisms of it. While certainly not ideal, we also have to recognize that their lives are safer, healthier, and happier in many cases. Crime rates are incredibly low; suicide rates, homelessness, and unemployment are practically non-existent, social bonds are stronger, charitable giving is 2-3 times greater, and infant mortality rates are lower than our own. Imagine not having to lock your car, or your home. Even simpler things like child care when you work is more readily available. Perhaps our disdain for their way of life is more rooted in our lack of knowledge about it.

I'm of the opinion that we can learn a lot from them as well as they can learn from us. But the xenophobic posturing that many of us take on when the topic of Islamic culture invading ours is brought up, only serves to increase tensions and drive us apart. This leads to less understanding, cooperation, and exchanges and ultimately a less safe world for both our cultures. With our crusading and colonial ways, we haven't exactly put our best foot forward. And our political, military, and economic hegemony of the past 100 years have hardly served to demonstrate that our way is better for them. It is a 2-world system where the rift grows deeper every time we focus on our differences rather than our commonalities. Dwelling on the minor impact of their culture as invading ours not only glosses over our own violently invading ways, but makes resolving our differences that much harder because we get lost in xenophobic irrationality.

While we talk of individualism, self-determination, and Manifest Destiny as virtues, coming from the dominant power, these ideals also smack of us-vs.them thinking, isolationism and the act of putting up walls between cultures. In essence, it is the antithesis of society. In nature, an isolated culture dies out and we should heed that lesson. At what point do we stop segregating out "undesirable" elements in our own society? After the Muslims are gone, do we then go after Catholics? Then Mormons? Jews? Unitarians? Pentecostals? And once we are all of the same church, do we then use skin color, gender-preference, income, birth, to further purify our ideal society? Dr. Strangelove would blush at the prospect, I'm sure....

It seems that many conservatives, Republicans, and religious-minded folks here in the US, are so focused on individualistic ideals and defending their possessions and beliefs that they loose sight of the fact that their views are really anti-social, anti-societal, and only viable on an individual basis. Living with others requires compromises, give-and-take, and tolerance. Anyone who doesn't believe so isn't married, lol. A society of one is not a society anymore.

There was a time during the cold war, when the a common criticism of extreme communists was that they were quite similar to fascists. I think the same logic can be applied here. At what point do our Western conservatives veer so far to the right that they meet Sharia Law fanatics on the other side? Wake up people: they are preaching the same isolationist and invasion-fearing rhetoric that some of us are. Perhaps unfortunately for both of you, real society, growth, and ultimately, the survival of our species, lies somewhere in between.

[markw]

Boy, you sure see things through rose-colored glasses, don't you? You make ithe muslim way of life look like some sort of idealistic society where justice prevails and evil is put in it's place and the western worlsdis the playground of satan.

If you want to talk about a second-class citizen, go live in a muslim controlled country. Be sure to bring your wife and daughters.

You DO realize thatt you've posted pretty much the he biggest load I've seen since I took colon-blow.

P.S. this was directed at nightflier.

[Smokey]

As for today, simply look around you. I cannot think of any country that is under muslim control as being any place for a non-muslim or a woman to live safely.

Apparently you didn’t google that subject

One wouldn’t think that any religion minority be living in Iran since the government is so extreme, but outside Israel, Iran have largest Jews population in the middle east (150,000-200,000). And healthy Christian population (300.000), and Zoroastrian (Fire God) which was original Persia religion before Islam.

Those three religions are recognize by the state and each one have a seat in parliament. They have churches, Senegal and fire temple to worship and live like any other citizen. The only thing that religion minority members can not do is to run for political office.

Here are some photos of Christians celebrating new year in a 400 year old church in Iran.

[markw]

According to other sources, the Sephardic Jewish population in Iran is 25,000. Where did you get your figure? They have been there since 500 bc and, strangely enough, do seem to be well treated..

And, as per this article, the Christian population in Iran is not exactly faring quite so well, and rarely has. snippet follows...

"Due to the socio-economic and political pressures in the years following the Iranian Revolution, periods of outright persecution and times of more latent discrimination, many Iranian Christians, both as part of the general exodus of Iranians and as response to the specific pressures, have emigrated, mostly to the USA, Canada and Western Europe. In 2000, about 0.4% of Iran's population were Christians. In 1975, Christians numbered about 1.5% of the total population. Statistically, a much larger percentage of non-Muslims have emigrated out of Iran.[citation needed]

While the government guarantees the recognised Christian minorities a number of rights (production and sale of non-halal foods),[citation needed] guaranteed representation in parliament, special family law etc.,[citation needed] government intrusion, expropriation of property, forced closure and persecution, particularly in the initial years after the Iranian Revolution, have all been documented. According to the Barnabas Fund, 'the regime rules through fear, and they want Christians to be afraid'. Most prominent has been the death of Haik Hovsepian Mehr, bishop of the Jamiat-e Rabbani, in 1994. Recently the continuing imprisonment of Hamid Pourmand,[2] [3] a lay pastor of Jammiat-e Rabboni, and the murder of Ghorban Tourani,[4] [5] the pastor of an independent evangelical church have created international concern."

Remember, all the religions you mention were there and were welcomed by the rulers of the country before Islam was invented, but the fact they remain is good, and a testament to their steadfast will to remain in their homeland.

[bobsticks]

The middle ages sucked, no matter who was in charge, but that's hundreds of years ago...

Is it? Because many of the same socioeconomic imperatives still exist...though, admittedly, if you were a stranger in the tourist district of a strange land that might be harder to divine.