General Discussions

The 'Jihad' Rant: Prove Me Wrong (warning: might be offenisve)

POSTED BY: HiroStone
UPDATED: Sunday, December 28, 2025 08:00
VIEWED: 22653
PAGE 2 of 11

HIROSTONE

Saturday, February 21, 2004 12:05 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Steve580:
How is ending a marriage and abandoning a family 'admirable'?
-Steve

I think he meant that he left his father, mother and siblings and wife who wouldn't accept his new faith. He sacrified all that for his faith.

I don't know if I could do that.

I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have. I must stand with anybody that stands right, stand with him while he is right, and part with him when he goes wrong.
- -- Abraham Lincoln

-Hiro

ASTRIANA

Saturday, February 21, 2004 12:09 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by HiroStone:
I’m an advocate; I like a good, well versed, logical argument. I can argue and justify ad nauseum, just as ‘Mike’ could’ve, if he ever made one, and I wished that he made one. That is my point: ‘Mike’ never made a point; he just pointed fingers, assigned blame, and said, “this is wrong,” without saying why.

This is very well said, Hiro. My only regret is that we are surrounded by so many that simply float along wherever the river of their life takes them, without a thought as to how or why. Because they float in this fashion, they themselves do not know why they react, and so cannot tell us.

Quote:
The various religions are like different roads converging on the same point. What difference does it make if we follow different routes, provided we arrive at the same destination.
- -- Mahatma Gandhi

We come into this world crying while all around us are smiling. May we so live that we go out of this world smiling while everybody around us is weeping.
- - Persian proverb

I love these quotes - And although I understand the sentiment of having those around us be sorry to see us leave this life, I would wish to go out of this world smiling, while those around me smile, thinking of the good things I left behind.

~A~

...I'm still free,
You can't take the sky from me.

JASONZZZ

Saturday, February 21, 2004 12:39 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Drakon:
Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
Look, it's fine that we help to free other folks from Saddam or other's brand of tyranny; but we ought to let people choose their brand of freedom instead of forcing our "Haliburton" brand down their throats. And especially not where we are trying to spread the word of "our God" (knowing that, of course, how silly that sounds. Since it's the same "God" off of the same myths)

First off, there is not a fine line between assisting them in setting up a functioning government, one that will ensure freedom and liberty for their people, and "shoving it down their throats" I don't think there are different "brands of freedom" Either you are the one who makes your choices or someone else does. Recent problems have had to do with the role of sharia in Iraq's post Saddam government, and this is a very big issue.

ok. i can agree with a system where people are free to choose. But what if something understands the concept but chooses to be bound to a master - would that be a flawed decision, would that be wrong? Can we accept that? That's what I was talking about. Of course, I've selected an extreme case where someone *seeminly* chooses to reject the basic principles of it for themselves. But look at Singapore, look at the English, look at Canadians. They all have different types of government based fundamentally on human freedom - just not our brand of it. Still works. People are still free, just not the same kind of free. I don't think people should be subjected to a sort of tyranny that we have around the world in history and today - but I don't think that our sort of freedom is well suited for the entire world either. People can choose to not be completely free - if they so wishes to. We in this country are choosing that right now - we have chosen to be not as free in our thoughts, our words, and our actions. We have chosen to give up a little bit of all of that freedom.

Quote:

Sharia, at least many interpretations of it, can be quite brutal. It can demand dhimmitude of non-muslims, extra taxes and fewer rights. The rights of women, well they go out the window if sharia has too large a role in the governing laws. Something Iraqi women have been protesting against of late.

Second, while it is great that the Iraqi people got liberated, it should be remembered that we did it for our own purely selfish reasons. To 'drain the swamp' as it were and prevent future terrorist attacks here in the US. The "root cause" is the lack of freedom, coupled with a culture that has had a long history of perfecting the means of misdirecting anger and frustration away from its own governments and institutions, and blaming it on the outside. If the new Iraqi constitution does not ensure the rights and freedoms of the Iraqi people, then we are right back where we started in 10 years time. Not something that either of us want.

Whatever it is, let them choose - we have absolutely no understanding of their culture, their thought processes, their environment. Our present form of government and our type of living comes from completely different things from those people. Do these people have a true right of self determination or will we decide for them? I guess we are going to decide for them is what I am thinking.

Quote:

So, we do have a system that has worked for 200 years. It may not be perfect, it may have a few bugs, but it has worked better and longer than almost any other government on the planet.

Whoa! 200 years of *long* running history! I like this country and am proud of what it's done (ok, well some of it) but let's not use the passage of time as a measure of our success... Other brutal forms of government has been around much longer and could *deem* to be successful in that way as well. Yeah, I know that's not what you mean, but it read that way.

Quote:

Another writer one time wrote that what we were telling the Iraqi peopel amounted to "you can have

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

HIROSTONE

Saturday, February 21, 2004 12:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
Quote:
Originally posted by Drakon:

So, we do have a system that has worked for 200 years. It may not be perfect, it may have a few bugs, but it has worked better and longer than almost any other government on the planet.

Whoa! 200 years of *long* running history! I like this country and am proud of what it's done (ok, well some of it) but let's not use the passage of time as a measure of our success... Other brutal forms of government has been around much longer and could *deem* to be successful in that way as well. Yeah, I know that's not what you mean, but it read that way.

Well, look what we've accomplished in 200 years. It ain't pretty and there was alot of hardship, but in 200 years, America's come a long way from upstart 13 colonies.

-Hiro

Wash: It's grotesque...! Oh and there's something in a jar.

MILORADELL

Saturday, February 21, 2004 1:03 AM

OK - I know I'm sick and said I wasn't going to be posting for a spell, but oooh oooh ooooh can I get in on this??? I spent my entire college career studying this stuff. Yep - that's me. BA in South Asian/Middle Eastern Studies - of course, that was ten years ago and things they have a-changed. And what was I going to use my degree towards? Get this - I applied with the FBI , only to find out they had something against diabetics. But hey, I could do office clerical. No - I'm not bitter at all! I only speak/read/write flipping Urdu!!! OK - enough of all that.

Anywho - here's the deal. There are specific injunctions in the Qur'an against proselytizing - you know, bringing your god to the people. Sorry - my copy is buried in some boxes, although I could have sworn I put it on the bookshelf next to Hindu Myths and Drawing Down the Moon. Oh well. Boiled down - if someone asks, you can tell them. If they don't ask, you don't start talking to them about your faith. End of story. So Jihad is not about going out and winning converts.

Now jihad is one of my favorite topics. I'm going to quote from one of my very respected teachers' books, Caesar Farah (from a Lebonese Christian family, for those who think it's important). The book is simply titled Islam.

Quote:
The idea of jihad in a military context with its emphasis on the notion of continuous struggle against non-believers in God as the sole deity tended to keep alive the spirit of solidarity in the community of and against outsiders. While the Qur'an does not make of jihad in the "holy war" context an article of faith, it is the Hadith which renders it into a formula for "active struggle" that invariably tended toward a militant expression.

This is all from page 158 of the fourth edition. Hadith are the collected "utterances" of Muhammad - things he said as a man. If you know anything about the Qur'an, then you know the mythos is that God spoke directly to Muhammad, and the Qur'an is his writing what God told him. So - Hadith has nothing to do with God, per se. They are the things a man said, and he is only a man. Never confuse Muhammad for an Islamic version of Jesus. Then there's Sharia'ah - something I've always disliked. But then, if you've read anything I've ever posted before, you probably know I'm something of a classic anarchist

anyway.

New paragraph, confusing topic.
Sharia'ah - this is legislation taken from both the Qur'an and the Hadith. So automatically, you've got man's bloody hand in it. I haven't read through Sharia'ah in ages, but here's something I remember vividly, and I think it's a good thing to keep in mind. Sharia'ah goes like this - the people in charge have an obligation to their citizens, to make sure they are fed, clothed, have access to whatever religion they follow, and generally kept healthy. Now this is a fundamental tenet that most everyone who has ever dealt with Sharia'ah, seems to have forgotten - if those things aren't being met, then you CANNOT cut the hand off of a thief. You CANNOT stone a woman who's accused of adultery. Etc, etc. So if the bubba's in charge aren't keeping to the contract, the whole thing's null and void. Ummm, right, that happens...never.

That's my two cents, take them or leave them. But - man, I love you guys! I almost never get to crack into this stuff!!! But I really, really have to go now - my lungs are trying to crawl out of my chest. I so love being sick

! Maybe it's my penance for being a dirty, rotten heathen - ha ha ha!!!!! roflmao!!!

p.s. - one of the oldest surviving govmt's to date is Brunei. And it's Islamic.

****
We Americans have no commission from God to police the world.
– Benjamin Harrison

The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.
– George Washington, Treaty of Tripoli, 1796

Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.
– Thomas Jefferson, February 10, 1814

HOTPOINT

Saturday, February 21, 2004 1:07 AM

One can only hope that eventually the whole world turns atheist and religious dogma and strife only exists as a subject for academic debate

...................................
Hurrah, hurrah, when things are at their worst
With cries of “Death or Glory” comes the mighty Twenty-First

MILORADELL

Saturday, February 21, 2004 1:14 AM

Bingo, man! And I adore your fics!!!!!!

KALATHENA

Saturday, February 21, 2004 1:15 AM

Quote:
Now, I don’t want to get into a rant here… but who the hell is “Mike” to be offended at this T-shirt?

and later you say...

Quote:
You have the right to shout into the wind at the top of your lungs an argument that another man would oppose at the top of his.

So we have the right to shout out our feelings, but this guy doesn't have the right to be offended? Surely you see the contradiction here.

Quote:
Bring up the Crusades? That was almost a thousand years ago, with men, just as religious who also thought they were doing God’s work. I’d like to think that we’ve come a long way since then.

I disagree. If the most powerful religion in the world today did not hold the power it does, it would not bother putting up any pretenses of interfaith work or trying to build bridges with people of other faiths. We would *still* be in the Crusades. I would also like to think otherwise, but to do so would only be deluding myself.

Quote:
Finger pointing is the last ditch effort of the desperate. Nowadays, people don’t want to take responsibilities for their shortcomings and want to put the blame on anyone else just to save their own ass.

This, on the otherhand, I whole-heartedly agree with. I particularly tire of the US conservative approach of continually blaming the Muslim world for the atrocities of a man that *WE* put into power.

--Kala

JASONZZZ

Saturday, February 21, 2004 1:22 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by HiroStone:

Well, look what we've accomplished in 200 years. It ain't pretty and there was alot of hardship, but in 200 years, America's come a long way from upstart 13 colonies.

-Hiro

Wash: It's grotesque...! Oh and there's something in a jar.

I don't know what kind of argument that is, but that sounds kinda like what everyone in America wants. "Well, I worked really hard on this, doesn't that mean something? Anything?" I say, "Well, running really really hard in place takes a lot of effort too. But have you really gone anywhere?" (And of course, I am vaguely refering to the mentality that many many people - not us, feel that they are entitled to something just b/c they have spend "lots of time" of it. Gosh! Show me the results. Where's the beef?!)

Look, I am not saying that we haven't gone anywhere either, but I am saying that spending a long long time doing something while spending lots of effort, sweating & presevering doesn't equate to a quality product nor does the sweating itself deserve any prize. From a purely meritocracy standpoint - only the result matters. Is it something of quality? Well, that is also in the eye of the beholder. What kind of cake I think might taste good isn't necessarily what you might like (or choose) to eat. See, you can almost always break down an argument into choices of Chocolate, Vanilla, or Peanut Butter & Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough with Pralies and Mocha Fudge swirl.

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

HIROSTONE

Saturday, February 21, 2004 2:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by kalathena:
Quote:
Now, I don’t want to get into a rant here… but who the hell is “Mike” to be offended at this T-shirt?

and later you say...

Quote:
You have the right to shout into the wind at the top of your lungs an argument that another man would oppose at the top of his.

So we have the right to shout out our feelings, but this guy doesn't have the right to be offended? Surely you see the contradiction here.

--Kala

This is totally taken out of context and misinterpreted.

'Mike' absolutely does the freedom to say that he's offended. He can shout it until his voice gets raw. I fully would fully support his right to free speech and tell me, "I'm wrong" a thousand times over. And I welcome him to do so. Just as I have the right to disagree with him. This is my point of view.

The second quote was reiterating that as an American, he as so many rights that people living elsewhere do not have. Rights that so many have paid dearly for.

We're all very lucky.

"I let no man drag me down so low as to make me hate him."
-by Booker T. Washington

-Hiro