Re: The Pope and Islam

On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 21:28:23 +0000, James Hammerton
<jameshammerton@xxxxxxxxxxx>

typed:
>On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 23:10:24 +0100, abelard <abelard2@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 9 Jan 2006 15:25:15 -0000, "Energumen"
>><energoumenos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> typed:
>>>"abelard" <abelard2@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>
>>>> i'm not primarily concerned with these books though the islamic writings
>>>> are much more complex/sophisticated than the nonsense of mein kampf
>>>> or marx....
>>>
>>>What do you mean by complex/sophisticated mean? Opaque? They are not THAT
>>>opaque, especially the Hadith, but even the Koran too. Of course many would
>>>like to think so.........
>>
>>i mean complex in the sense of being manuals for social behaviour eg...
>
>So, rereading what you wrote above about islamic writings being more
>complex than the nonsense of Mein Kampf or Marx it appears you're
>suggesting that islamic writings are more of a manual for social
>behaviour than Mein Kampf or the works of Marx...
>
>I'm not sure what to make of that!

rules on how to treat your neighbour...marriage rules...inheritance
rules etc....not greatly different from the bible

>>it is obviously clear that elements of the manual stink....
>>
>>i am not arguing that the whole manifesto is clean and pure....some
>> of it is unmitigated junk...or poisonous if you prefer....
>>so is the old testament....some of the new testament is logical tripe
>> and included is the widespread poison of "he that is not with me is
>> against me." matt 12, v. 30 and luke ch. 11, v. 23
>
>A similar piece of logical tripe is "If you're not part of the
>solution then you're part of the problem".

ok....

>>let alone the tripe in mein kampf and marx....
>>
>>what i am saying is most avowed adherents of these various cults
>> can't think clearly, haven't read the manifestos and many can't even
>> read....
>
>And are hence easily swayed by those that can read, have read the
>manifestos and wish to harness the power they thereby get over the
>rest of the adherents?

of course religions also produce saints and idealists...some of them
also have associated problems....eg they're only doing it for your own
good

>>we do have a serious problem with these benighted primitives but
>> it won't be solved by substituting crap reasoning for steady analysis
>> of the poison and those who carry and spread it...
>>
>>>> i s'pose i'd better link you to this on which i am working as
>>>> collaborator...
>>>> not really ready for the full light of day yet.....
>>>> http://www.aoiko.net/politics/20050108steyn_deconstruction.php#footnote_arab
>>>>
>>>> in national socialist germany and socialist russia there were trillions of
>>>> 'ordinary' mugs who voted for hitler or thrilled at the parades in red
>>>> square who were *strongly* apolitical....
>>>> some of the dumbasses even voted for hitler and cheered him on
>>>> his ride abouts....the **vast majority** never read mein kampf....
>>>
>>>How different is that from the people who followed Mohammed in his war
>>>against Mecca, or the Moors who invaded Spain, or the Arabs who invaded
>>>Persia? Most of those guys couldn't even read.
>>
>>that is effectively what i am saying....
>>
>>>> even the fools in the west who read him mostly supposed it was
>>>> rhetoric...'surely he's not mad'....trouble is he was raving....
>>>
>>>Reminds me of a lot of people today who say that the Koran and Hadith have
>>>"many interpretations" ;-)
>>
>>how many get it first hand rather than through the posers in the mosques
>> and palaces....
>
>Are you suggesting that if more Muslims were aware of what's in the
>Koran/Hadiths from first hand reading, it would help prevent them
>being manipulated by the clerics?

if they were 'educated' only in the koran without guidance i doubt
that it would stop entirely the violence....
but most education is in a social context...

i would rather they had a modern education in psychology to compare
and the attitudes of other culture to remove the silly notion that
there was only one best way...
and by enormous luck they happened to be part of it...

>>>> not greatly different in moscow where most all the little socialists from
>>>> the west went and saw what they wanted to see....
>>>>
>>>> now...islam is not nearly such a top down religion as catholicism or
>>>> even the standard socialist hierarchical examples....
>>>
>>>It establishes a hierarchical order but is very prone to people disputing
>>>the hierarchies due to lack of centralised authority. It is not inherently
>>>individualistic - far from it.
>>
>>depends on who is reading it....
>>large numbers of these mullahs appear to be using it merely for
>> self gratification and power....
>>christianism often has the theology that it is for god to judge....not
>> for priests to set themselves up in god's place...yet the pattern
>> is usually priestly authoritarianism...
>
>I've often wonder about the confession in catholicism. ISTM that the
>end result of people regularly confessing their sins to their priest,
>is that the priest knows all the dirt in his parish/congregation...

sure...and it is a power/subservient trip....
a common claim by the priesthood is that the 'vocation' of priesthood
trumps all others...

>>>> it is mostly the spoiled idle middle class kids who are at the heart of
>>>> 'islamic' mayhem....
>>>
>>>A big reason that more educated Muslims and especially converts are
>>>disproportionately involved in violence is that they have actually read the
>>>texts and understood them.
>>
>>i don't like the logic of 'understood them'...every person's reading of
>> *any* text is an interpretation...
>
>I wonder if anyone would interpret your post as a love song aimed at
>Hognoxious...

oy...leavitout....he's a minor!

>>it is arrogance and foolishness to believe otherwise
>
>True, but that doesn't give infinite maneouvre for how you interpret a
>text.

probably...but the amount of wriggling the clever monkey can manage
approaches infinity!

>If the text is written in English, then there will be some
>similarities amongst how English speakers interpret it .

ok....i've no problem with demonstrated and defined 'similarity' :-)

>E.g. the word "interpret" is not normally interpreted to mean "head
>butting a cantelope"...

indeed...it usually means either eating a cantaloupe or headbutting a
frog...

>Likewise if a religious text tells all believes to either convert or
>kill non-believers it's unlikely to be interpreted to mean "live and
>let live"...

aside: get serious ab and stop giggling....
ok, i'll work from there if it helps!

>>>I'm not concerned about differing interpretations on things that don't
>>>matter to Islam's compatibility with democracy and human rights. With
>>>Ahmadiyya you may have a point - they are a special case, with additional
>>>texts, like Mormons are to Christianity. The differences between Shia and
>>>Sunni are not relevant to the context of this debate. Sufism is not a
>>>denomination but is rather a mystical tradition that crosses denominations.
>>
>>i'm not in dispute with you i think in terms of crude action...
>>i am worrying at the logic and the fuzzy focus....
>>
>>i think both of us would slam the door shut until we had better structures
>> and laws in place..
>
>Does "slam the door shut" = end immigration from Muslim countries?

i would on at least a temporary basis....

>>>I don't, and I also believe that democracy and natural law will win in the
>>>end. I can perfectly well accept that Muslims can come to accept democracy
>>>and human rights. The point in question, is if they do so, at the end of the
>>>process will they still be Muslims?
>>
>>i don't care what they call themselves...only that they behave themselves
>> in a sane and civilised manner
>
>One might ask what the definition of "Muslim" is in this context...

i continue with self-definition as a start basis....

>>> IMO the answer is no. Like Ayaan Hirsi
>>>Ali they will logically have to dump Islam. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
>>>Christianity in Europe is a half dead, staggering semi-corpse. Islam may
>>>very well follow it. Hopefully it will.
>>
>>the christianist baybee has been thrown out with the bathwater...
>>the peasants may well need their opiates
>>socialism is a puritanical christianist schism....it has thrown out care
>> for the individual...it has effectively thrown out ethics....
>>i don't particularly wish to lose that if it is part of islam any more
>> than i want to lose it from the christianist tradition....
>>imv it is the mixing of the foul stench of socialism (and nationalism)
>> that is a cost at the gates of socialism that helps breed the jihadis
>> and the madsams...
>>
>>ideas of guesthood and honour are also parts of islam....
>>it is not all poison....
>>
>>mostly you don't shoot madmen...you try to cure them...
>
>And stop them causing carnage (which may require shooting them).

certainly....

>>>> ps i'm running to keep up and will be for some days at least so this is
>>>> rushed...see the large fisking of steyn linked above...it is being
>>>> updated...at times by the hour!
>>>>
>>>> if your position is that of steyn or that of your vatican shill i think
>>>> much of the core of the argument is shot...
>>>
>>>Perhaps if instead of saying that Islam is incompatible with democracy and
>>>human rights I said that the teachings (and example) of Mohammed are
>>>incompatible with democracy and human rights would that help any?
>>
>>to a good degree but islam is more than just jihad and takeyya
>
>What "is" Islam?

the sum of bodies self-defining is my start point...

regards...

--
web site at www.abelard.org - news and comment service, logic,
energy, education, politics, etc 1,544,346 document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.