I'm saying that there is not enough energy devoted by the Muslim community in repudiating these groups.
MCC proves you wrong.
Indeed, if the wider Muslim community repudiated extremism as much as other religious groups do it, then Muslim extremists would not exist in the numbers that they do.
The problem was not created by the Muslim community in the first place. You can thank the Cold War and American support for right wing fundamentalism that it has got to this level. Turn back the clock, and majority of the Arab countries were either socialist and communist or had huge socialist domestic movements. America drowned them out by funding and propping the Islamic fundamentalists. So now you cannot tell the Muslim community to fix yourself up, after fking them over so bad. MCC and such groups are the answer and these should be sanctioned as such; putting the radical Islamist groups on the pedestal by grouping all Muslims under them is brainless logic; and one I'm just not going to buy.
No, you're the one turning every quote from me into a kirpan quote, and relating everything to the kirpan issue, which shows your inordinate fixation on the issue. I'm saying that people can be legitimately opposed to students carrying a kirpan at school without automatically being racist. There's a legitimate public safety concern. Those who adhere to a religious practice will automatically tend to protect that practice, regardless of what it is - and they may do so to the point of irrationality.
Lol. Right, I'm turning every quote into Kirpan issue, and your above quote has nothing to do with it.
And for the last time, no one has claimed racism, only ignorance. As it is on your part.
Atheism is based on logical reductionism and economy of belief - ie. Occam's Razor - as such, it is not merely 'another belief'.
When Man's powers of reason and technical knowledge of the world were poor, then he invented and relied upon faith to explain the world to him. But as our powers of reason and physical knowledge of the world have grown, there is no longer any reason to blindly believe that the world was created in 7 days, or that the Sun travels across the sky in a magical chariot, etc, etc. These things have simply been handed down as cultural traditions.
I know all the reasonings for atheism, I was one for 4 years. I wasn't satisfied with it, hence I went back to my agnostic self. And no matter how much your knowledge expands, it can never explain the most basic things. Existence for example. Not just ours, but of the entire universe. And what's beyond? As far as I am concerned, theism is a concept/theory which fills in the gap for the lack of a better explanation. Just as all great scientific theories. Some of the greatest brains in science were and are Theists. Even Albert Einstein was a deist and believed that this world has a creator.
It's oddly conspicuous how the countries where blind and unconstrained acceptance of religion are the strongest and atheism has the lowest presence are also the countries with the lowest quality of life, and where people are trying to emigrate out of, whereas countries where religion is kept in check by laws separating Church and State and where atheism has largest presence are also the countries which enjoy the highest living standards and are also the countries where the backward people are trying desperately to immigrate into. There's a reason for that -
Yeh, like China.
Get real sanjay.
The bulk of Muslims don't participate in either of these 2 groups, but I'd still say that ElMasry's views are closer to the median than Tariq Fatah's are.
Mere speculations. But than again, you are one who mixes up conservatism with radicalism, so I am not surprised you would place the median closer to ElMasry. You are reading conservatives as radicals.
There is too much conservatism in the Muslim community, and not enough reformist views.
There is nothing wrong with conservatism or conservative values. It is the intolerance which must be checked.
I went to University of Waterloo a long time ago - which is when ElMasry first showed up. I was in a different engineering, and it was he who was a prof in Electrical Engineering - that's all you need to know.
Thats too bad. I have many Muslim friends which go to Waterloo, I can get you acquainted with them, and they would be more than happy to punch holes into your whole "muslim community supports radical Islamists" posturing.
Whenever I see Muslim groups mention Kashmir, they only mention it in a way that is anti-Indian. When Indians show up to oppose the pro-separatist events, I feel that Muslims under-represent themselves.
Tell me, not that I have ever heard of any Kashmir pro-separatist event in Canada, but suppose there is one and I show up tomorrow to protest against it. How do you know if I am a Sikh, Muslim or Hindu?
When organizations like OIC attack India, where are our Indian Muslims repudiating them, and telling them their activities have nothing to do with Islam?
A two fold answer.
1. OIC sticks its nose into Kashmir issue, on behest of Pakistan; though it has never classified it as an "Islamic" issue, therefore Indian muslims have little locus standi to protest exclusively against OIC.
2. Indian Muslims have little to do with OIC since the OIC has blocked the inclusion of the world's second largest Muslim community. Indian Muslims are represented by India, and that is enough. India repudiating OIC
is on behalf of all Indians.
When I see that Islam is so frequently invoked to attack India, as it was used to partition it, then naturally it says a lot about Islam. It's an ideology, and not just a religion, which affects its ability to coexist with other ethnicities and religions.
Yes, says a lot about alcohol chugging, pork eating, Parsee marrying, Muslim leaders partitioning India for Islam doesn't it?
loll. You don't need to be much smarter to see what the real problem is, and its not Islam.
