Iran Arrests Suspected Converts to Christianity

Page 2 of 5 [ 70 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,150
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

30 May 2008, 4:28 pm

monty wrote:
marshall wrote:
Exceedingly few Christians have that middle age mindset these days, yet a sizable minority of Muslims still do.



Not true - there are a lot of Christians between the ages of 35 and 65, and they think and act accordingly.


Quick severity check though, are Christians giving physical coercion to the degree of whipping (not s&m flogging, picking flesh off of muscle), cutting off body parts, murdering their children if they go secular or atheist? Can you criticize them and not have to worry about hiring police protection? Saying Christian's are equal to that, regardless of action, just on mechanics and intent - its cozy, its politically correct, people will like a person for saying and thinking it but its not true and regrettably dangerous because its a loss of scope.

Mind you, I'd never defend Christians who literally push religion down someone's throat for the sake of it - I believe that anyone who pushes anything down anyone's throat; particularly if it ends up being something as personal as religion, is lost in some utopian vision and they're not only acting horridly but they're giving everyone else a really bad rap who's of the respective religion their representing. I've heard people argue that Iraq for instance was really about oil, I've heard revenge for Bush's dad, those can't be ruled out as possible motivators, but I don't think its possible to say that any of the war on terror has been to conquer Muslims for the sake of converting them to Christianity.



monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

30 May 2008, 4:30 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
monty wrote:
marshall wrote:
Exceedingly few Christians have that middle age mindset these days, yet a sizable minority of Muslims still do.



Not true - there are a lot of Christians between the ages of 35 and 65, and they think and act accordingly.


Quick severity check though, are Christians giving physical coercion to the degree of whipping (not s&m flogging, picking flesh off of muscle), cutting off body parts, murdering their children if they go secular or atheist? Can you criticize them and not have to worry about hiring police protection? Saying Christian's are equal to that, regardless of action, just on mechanics and intent - its cozy, its politically correct, people will like a person for saying and thinking it but its not true and regrettably dangerous because its a loss of scope.

Mind you, I'd never defend Christians who literally push religion down someone's throat for the sake of it - I believe that anyone who pushes anything down anyone's throat; particularly if it ends up being something as personal as religion, is lost in some utopian vision and they're not only acting horridly but they're giving everyone else a really bad rap who's of the respective religion their representing. I've heard people argue that Iraq for instance was really about oil, I've heard revenge for Bush's dad, those can't be ruled out as possible motivators, but I don't think its possible to say that any of the war on terror has been to conquer Muslims for the sake of converting them to Christianity.


Sorry, mate. That was a joke. I am middle-aged myself ... pushing 50.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,150
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

30 May 2008, 5:27 pm

monty wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
monty wrote:
marshall wrote:
Exceedingly few Christians have that middle age mindset these days, yet a sizable minority of Muslims still do.



Not true - there are a lot of Christians between the ages of 35 and 65, and they think and act accordingly.


Quick severity check though, are Christians giving physical coercion to the degree of whipping (not s&m flogging, picking flesh off of muscle), cutting off body parts, murdering their children if they go secular or atheist? Can you criticize them and not have to worry about hiring police protection? Saying Christian's are equal to that, regardless of action, just on mechanics and intent - its cozy, its politically correct, people will like a person for saying and thinking it but its not true and regrettably dangerous because its a loss of scope.

Mind you, I'd never defend Christians who literally push religion down someone's throat for the sake of it - I believe that anyone who pushes anything down anyone's throat; particularly if it ends up being something as personal as religion, is lost in some utopian vision and they're not only acting horridly but they're giving everyone else a really bad rap who's of the respective religion their representing. I've heard people argue that Iraq for instance was really about oil, I've heard revenge for Bush's dad, those can't be ruled out as possible motivators, but I don't think its possible to say that any of the war on terror has been to conquer Muslims for the sake of converting them to Christianity.


Sorry, mate. That was a joke. I am middle-aged myself ... pushing 50.


Ah..... so your saying that I should have drank my coffee *then* read it. Got ya.



Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

30 May 2008, 5:41 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Ragtime, its nothing new or surprising. Just look at what happened in Beirut. If that doesn't say it in a nutshell I don't know what else would.

I know it's nothing new or surprising, but it apparently is to many people on WP who deny that Christians are persecuted throughout the world. You knew it; it doesn't mean others have been so attentive.



Kilroy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,549
Location: Beyond the Void

30 May 2008, 5:52 pm

the way I see it

its karma



Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

30 May 2008, 5:53 pm

marshall wrote:
Kalister1 wrote:
Christianity has a long history of forcefully converting people too. During the Dark Ages, many Pagans were put to death for their beliefs. Please don't act all high and mighty about Christianity, its all the same disease.


The “but Christians did that too” is a fallacious argument. It doesn’t excuse what Iran is doing one bit. Exceedingly few Christians have that middle age mindset these days, yet a sizable minority of Muslims still do.

The only thing I would argue with Raggy is that he never mentions the other people repressed under Islamic theocracy regimes. What about Bahai’s, pagans, Buddhists, mystics, atheists? Why do Christians always care about the people of their own sect above all others?


You assume my feelings, and you err. I just don't see pagans being oppressed in the news that often.
But I do believe it happens, and I know it's wrong.

marshall wrote:
Muslims are more anti-atheist than they are anti-Christian. Christians and Jews are considered “people of the book” and given some privileges not afforded to others.


"People of the book", "children of apes and pigs", "the Zionist scum"... I guess the phraseology must vary from day to day, huh?



Kilroy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,549
Location: Beyond the Void

30 May 2008, 5:56 pm

because they are quiet about it



Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

30 May 2008, 5:59 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
i'm not a fan of FDR or JFK and i agree with you in the sense that they spend money like those democrats. only difference is they try to not tax as much...but even so, they still offer better tax breaks to the highest brackets.

the neo-cons are as ideologically flawed as the communists. even down to too much focus on government power over individual free choice.

it doesn't help that the neo-cons have come into vogue thanks to fox news and karl rove...though, in my opinion, kissinger really got the ball rolling for the neo-cons to be as prevalent and as much of a force as they are today.


I think most are of the opinion that there's already too much government waste, state pork tacked to various bills, and they'd rather cut entitlement programs (like the farm subsidies for example) rather than take that from the tax payers whoever they may be. I at least like the answers I'm hearing on that side as well on energy issues - better to build nuclear reactors, wind farms, build new refineries, or drill in Alaska rather than just bring oil execs in and grill them on why oil is getting so expensive as the rest of the world's demand multiplies and as even Saudi Arabia's ability to produce oil is leveling off.

Maybe I am being fed a line of garbage but it keeps sounding like on the left I hear a lot of people who don't want to pay attention to the science, to the cause and effect of why things are the way they are, but are preferring to bend what they hear to cater to a political base which they have (largely) endeared on grounds of entitlement. The war on terror of course I leave alone just because, I believe it when its been said that all 3 of these presidents would do the same thing once they're getting the intelligence reports; they do warn Obama though of what happened with JFK when he met to chat with Nikita Kruschev, just off the mistaken perception that John F Kennedy was a weak man it actually bred the Cuban Missile Crisis - they found out otherwise but nearly at the cost of nuclear war; Obama can't make the same mistake with Ahmadinejad.


QFT, and CHSIBM (couldn't have said it better myself).



Khan_Sama
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 882
Location: New Human Empire

30 May 2008, 9:13 pm

Ragtime wrote:
marshall wrote:
Kalister1 wrote:
Christianity has a long history of forcefully converting people too. During the Dark Ages, many Pagans were put to death for their beliefs. Please don't act all high and mighty about Christianity, its all the same disease.


The “but Christians did that too” is a fallacious argument. It doesn’t excuse what Iran is doing one bit. Exceedingly few Christians have that middle age mindset these days, yet a sizable minority of Muslims still do.

The only thing I would argue with Raggy is that he never mentions the other people repressed under Islamic theocracy regimes. What about Bahai’s, pagans, Buddhists, mystics, atheists? Why do Christians always care about the people of their own sect above all others?


You assume my feelings, and you err. I just don't see pagans being oppressed in the news that often.
But I do believe it happens, and I know it's wrong.

marshall wrote:
Muslims are more anti-atheist than they are anti-Christian. Christians and Jews are considered “people of the book” and given some privileges not afforded to others.


"People of the book", "children of apes and pigs", "the Zionist scum"... I guess the phraseology must vary from day to day, huh?


What makes you think that Muslims haven't been persecuted in the past or the present?

Generally, the term Muslims use to define non-Muslims is the word "Kafir" (infidel). "People of the book" generally includes Christians and Jews, but also included Zoroastrians and Manicheans in the past. Christians, Jews, etc were just given more political rights than pagans in Islamic dynasties, that's all. Muslims don't use the term "people of the book" while refering to Christians or Jews however, they simply call them Christians and Jews when specifically refering to them. The word Kafir is a universal term for all non-Muslims. I've never heard "children of apes and pigs" before, though Zionist scum is quite common. However, Zionism is a political movement, not a religion.



oscuria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,748

30 May 2008, 11:14 pm

I find the muslim world hypocritical. They "invest" money abroad setting up Islamic schools, in building mosques, and advancing Islamic/Quranic material. BUT where are the Christians, Jews, and Hindus in their countries? You won't find Jews practice their beliefs openly. You won't find any bible in Saudia Arabia--a country which does most of the proselytizing. You'll have Muslims proselytizing in Christian majority countries but do you see Christian missionaries out in the open in Islamic countries?

I say until the Islamic world allows Religious pluralism there shouldn't be a reason to allow foreign investments by Islamic sources. But then again that wouldn't be democratic nor humanistic.


_________________
sticks and stones may kill you.


marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

31 May 2008, 1:54 am

oscuria wrote:
I find the muslim world hypocritical. They "invest" money abroad setting up Islamic schools, in building mosques, and advancing Islamic/Quranic material. BUT where are the Christians, Jews, and Hindus in their countries? You won't find Jews practice their beliefs openly. You won't find any bible in Saudia Arabia--a country which does most of the proselytizing. You'll have Muslims proselytizing in Christian majority countries but do you see Christian missionaries out in the open in Islamic countries?

I say until the Islamic world allows Religious pluralism there shouldn't be a reason to allow foreign investments by Islamic sources. But then again that wouldn't be democratic nor humanistic.


:lol: What makes you think they have to be even handed?

They don’t have to accept pluralism because their religion is “The Truth”(TM) while all the other religions are “false”. The notion of pluralism is merely a diplomatic convenience to them. In practice “The Truth”(TM) gives them carte blanche. That’s what tends to happen when people take religion too seriously. Christianity was the same way before the 18th century.

Even today a lot of Christians in the US don’t completely accept pluralism. They still have certain rules they feel they need to force on everyone. I think the hardline Evangelicals that rail against the lack of pluralism in Islam while simultaneously pushing that “US is a Christian nation” nonsense are the true hypocrites.



oscuria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,748

31 May 2008, 2:18 am

If they do not allow non-islamic missionaries in their countries, then other countries shouldn't accept their "investments." I already know the "Truth" argument. That is just stupid when considering how much money Muslim countries send abroad too fashion Islam as peaceful and tolerant when in their own countries the minority religions aren't given any peace or tolerance, not even different Muslim sects.


The second part of your argument is of no relation. Where are the Christians who are arresting/murdering Muslim proselytizers or Christian apostates? An act which is too common in Islamic countries. The evangelicals aren't in charge of politics, despite popular belief. What matters what they have to say? Everyone knows that there is a great deal of hypocrisy in the Evangelical movement. Not many are willing to turn away from the same hypocrisy found in Muslims.


Everyone keeps bringing up the past. Yes, and in the past we walked around naked, and hunted and gathered our own food, living in caves. Today, how many of us actually do such a thing? A lunatic would.


_________________
sticks and stones may kill you.


Khan_Sama
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 882
Location: New Human Empire

31 May 2008, 4:16 am

oscuria wrote:
I find the muslim world hypocritical. They "invest" money abroad setting up Islamic schools, in building mosques, and advancing Islamic/Quranic material. BUT where are the Christians, Jews, and Hindus in their countries? You won't find Jews practice their beliefs openly. You won't find any bible in Saudia Arabia--a country which does most of the proselytizing. You'll have Muslims proselytizing in Christian majority countries but do you see Christian missionaries out in the open in Islamic countries?

I say until the Islamic world allows Religious pluralism there shouldn't be a reason to allow foreign investments by Islamic sources. But then again that wouldn't be democratic nor humanistic.


There are lots of Christians and Jews in Muslim countries. Lebanon is 25% Christian (Maronite), Egypt is 10% Christian (coptic), Ethiopia has Christians and Muslims in almost equal numbers, Syria & Iraq have lots of Aramaic speaking Christians belonging to the Assyrian church. Iran has the largest Jewish population in the middle east outside Palestine. They practice their views quite openly, there's been only one public incident of a Muslim killing a Jew in Iran over the Zionist issue in the past decade. There are LOTS of Christian missionaries in the secular Muslim countries, mainly Iraq, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, etc. Oh yeah, Pakistan has a 2% Hindu population, Bangladesh has a 15% Hindu population, and there are lots of Hindus in Indonesia practicing Balinese Shaivite Hinduism (probably 3% of the total population, Indonesia groups Buddhists, Hindus, and Animists together in public surveys). The gulf countries have large Hindu expat communities, the highest in the United Arab Emirates (you should visit it sometime, it's the only Arab country where the Arab citizens make up 1/5th of the population, a truly multicultural and prosperous population, and it's bang right near the centre of the Islamic world, Muslims make up around 50% of the population there, as in most of the tiny Gulf monarchies), I do believe that Hindus make up 20% of the UAE's population, although it could be higher. To say that Islamic countries (and taking the KSA and Iran as examples) don't have religious pluralism is rather hillarious.

oscuria wrote:
If they do not allow non-islamic missionaries in their countries, then other countries shouldn't accept their "investments." I already know the "Truth" argument. That is just stupid when considering how much money Muslim countries send abroad too fashion Islam as peaceful and tolerant when in their own countries the minority religions aren't given any peace or tolerance, not even different Muslim sects.


The second part of your argument is of no relation. Where are the Christians who are arresting/murdering Muslim proselytizers or Christian apostates? An act which is too common in Islamic countries. The evangelicals aren't in charge of politics, despite popular belief. What matters what they have to say? Everyone knows that there is a great deal of hypocrisy in the Evangelical movement. Not many are willing to turn away from the same hypocrisy found in Muslims.


Everyone keeps bringing up the past. Yes, and in the past we walked around naked, and hunted and gathered our own food, living in caves. Today, how many of us actually do such a thing? A lunatic would.


No Muslim country shows direct intolerance, they just have restrictions imposed. For example, in the KSA, proselytizing and public display of non-Islamic religious material is illegal, but legal for personal use. The UAE also has the same laws, but allows construction of non-Muslim religious buildings with governmental approval. The same applies to all the Gulf countries, sans Iraq and Yemen, which are secular.

I don't know about Christians murdering or arresting Muslim proselytizers, but there have been a few incidents in the US since 9/11 when a few Sikhs have been murdered by people mistaking them as Muslims. If that's not intolerance, what is?

There are lots of people walking around naked in the west. They're known as nudists.

Honestly oscuria, I think that the image of the Islamic world that you have is that of a bunch of bearded men and women covered in black living in tents in oasis's and using camels for transport.



oscuria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,748

31 May 2008, 5:42 am

I don't like using Wiki, but it has readable info and is somewhat easy to verify.


Ah, Egypt:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of ... n_in_Egypt

How free are the Baha'i allowed to practice when the government doesn't officially recognize their existence?


Syria needs pluralism because the Alawites are the one in power. That is the only reason. Sadly, the Jehova Witnesses are banned in Syria.


Iraq has religious freedom? I recall reading that the Mandaeans are being killed to the point that their very existence as a religion and a people is being threatened. There is nothing religious happening in Iraq. Perhaps, after the country is fixed. We'll see. Before it was relatively peaceful.


Saudi Arabia even bans valentine cards and red hearts, do you think they'll allow a person to carry around a cross in public? No, because non-Islamic religious symbols are banned, including the bible. How can they use material that is banned for personal use?

Is this freedom?


The gulf states like Bahrain has Sikh, Bahai, and other temples. Anything, but those Shias.

UAE: "The Government prohibits non-Muslims from proselytizing or distributing religious literature, under penalty of criminal prosecution, imprisonment, and deportation, as it constitutes engaging in behavior offensive to Islam. While there are no specific laws against missionary activities, in the past the Government reportedly has threatened to revoke the residence permits of persons suspected of missionary activities. There were no reports of such threats during the period covered by this report." Well that's nice of them.


You mentioned Bangladesh:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/a ... 019813.php

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of ... Bangladesh


Pakistan? You being an Indian should know that the Pakistanis have not been so hospitable to the Hindus. Of course, the Hindus in India don't always treat the Muslims kindly in some instances.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_in_Pakistan


Indonesia love the Jews and the Ahmadiyyas, don't they? How many times have people protested violently against the ahmadiyya?


This is an incident which is rarely ever heard of in the West committed by Christians, and in Turkey of all places.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6568911.stm


Yes, the vigilante justice that occurred after 9/11 was an event which brought animals into the spotlight. But it is not a common thing, in fact it is isolated to that event, while muslims who convert outside of their faith are arrested or murdered by their own people. However, such "justice" was not what I had in mind in my posts and you should have understood that. If that was the case, then the converts to Islam post-9/11, and there have been many, would have been shot dead already, when you consider that the men were killed for appearing middle eastern/muslim, and not for converting.

The fact that missionaries are allowed in some Islamic countries is one, the fact that they can't acquire converts or spread the "gospel" is another. This is what I meant about pluralism. In the west you won't find Islamic proselytizers being arrested or banning the selling of Qur'ans, or the destruction of Mosques just because they don't follow the religion of the majority. Is there discrimination? Yes, but the same laws discriminate against Christians.

You see the propaganda from the Muslims in the west, haven't you? There have been protest near the remains of the twin towers where Muslims called for the destruction of America. There have been protests in Europe where Muslims can be seen spouting off ridiculous rhetoric against their host country. I want to see this in the Islamic world, and not by it being followed with military tanks running over the people.


_________________
sticks and stones may kill you.


marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

31 May 2008, 6:22 pm

Khan_Sama wrote:
No Muslim country shows direct intolerance, they just have restrictions imposed. For example, in the KSA, proselytizing and public display of non-Islamic religious material is illegal, but legal for personal use. The UAE also has the same laws, but allows construction of non-Muslim religious buildings with governmental approval. The same applies to all the Gulf countries, sans Iraq and Yemen, which are secular.

:lol: :roll: That's the best you can come up with. Hahahaha.

This is so sad. Denying freedom of speech to the competition is not tolerance.
It only serves to show that your religion is powerless without government/authority propping it up. If a religion was actually true you'd think it would be able to spread on its own merit without the need to place restrictions on the competition.

Quote:
I don't know about Christians murdering or arresting Muslim proselytizers, but there have been a few incidents in the US since 9/11 when a few Sikhs have been murdered by people mistaking them as Muslims. If that's not intolerance, what is?


There is a VERY important distinction here. These were ILLEGAL and CRIMINAL actions taken by specific individuals. These individuals are in prison now. This is not GOVERNMENT endorsed intolerance like you have in KSA and Iran.

Quote:
There are lots of people walking around naked in the west. They're known as nudists.

:lol: That’s just stupid. In most western countries that I’m aware of public nudity is illegal except in specific designated places.

Quote:
Honestly oscuria, I think that the image of the Islamic world that you have is that of a bunch of bearded men and women covered in black living in tents in oasis's and using camels for transport.

I’m not going to speak for oscuria, but I don’t think that at all. I don’t see Muslims as being any different from westerners in most cases. Just because I don’t approve of everything in Islamic culture doesn’t mean I’m ignorant. I don’t approve of the Islamic religion because it’s promoted on fear and unconditional authority, things which are antithetical to my own philosophy. I don’t care much for Christianity either, mostly for the same reasons. Sorry.



Khan_Sama
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 882
Location: New Human Empire

31 May 2008, 8:58 pm

oscuria wrote:
I don't like using Wiki, but it has readable info and is somewhat easy to verify.


Ah, Egypt:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of ... n_in_Egypt

How free are the Baha'i allowed to practice when the government doesn't officially recognize their existence?


You asked about Christians, Jews, and Hindus. As far as Muslims are concerned, the Baha'i faith, as the Ahmadiya sect, are heretic offshoots of Islam. I'm surprised that Iran and Egypt are the only Muslim countries that haven't recognised the faith.

Quote:
Syria needs pluralism because the Alawites are the one in power. That is the only reason. Sadly, the Jehova Witnesses are banned in Syria.


Yes, that's because they have a habit of proselytizing too much. It's annoying.

Quote:
Iraq has religious freedom? I recall reading that the Mandaeans are being killed to the point that their very existence as a religion and a people is being threatened. There is nothing religious happening in Iraq. Perhaps, after the country is fixed. We'll see. Before it was relatively peaceful.


And who exactly is responsible for disturbing the peace? We all know too well.

Quote:
Saudi Arabia even bans valentine cards and red hearts, do you think they'll allow a person to carry around a cross in public? No, because non-Islamic religious symbols are banned, including the bible. How can they use material that is banned for personal use?


Public display is illegal. It's not illegal for private use.

Quote:


Well, he specifically went to the KSA only to hold mass with his fellow Christians. We all know only too well of the KSA's intolerance. Yes, it's not freedom, but the KSA has just too many restrictive laws. The KSA shows more intolerance towards the Shi'a. Christian expats find it easier to gain employment in the KSA than the Shi'a. Iirc, over half of the unemployed in the KSA are Shi'a.

Quote:
The gulf states like Bahrain has Sikh, Bahai, and other temples. Anything, but those Shias.


Huh? Bahrain has a Shi'a majority. o.o

Quote:
UAE: "The Government prohibits non-Muslims from proselytizing or distributing religious literature, under penalty of criminal prosecution, imprisonment, and deportation, as it constitutes engaging in behavior offensive to Islam. While there are no specific laws against missionary activities, in the past the Government reportedly has threatened to revoke the residence permits of persons suspected of missionary activities. There were no reports of such threats during the period covered by this report." Well that's nice of them.


There's no difference between the USA and the UAE, IMO. The UAE is an Americanised Arab state. Dubai is the drug & prostitute capital of the middle east. The UAE changes every day. Now it's legal for residents to sue taxi drivers! The UAE has the fastest development in the middle east when it comes to human rights.


Quote:


Mob violence is common everywhere in South Asia. Bangladesh is no exception.

Quote:
Pakistan? You being an Indian should know that the Pakistanis have not been so hospitable to the Hindus. Of course, the Hindus in India don't always treat the Muslims kindly in some instances.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_in_Pakistan


Again, mob violence.

Quote:
Indonesia love the Jews and the Ahmadiyyas, don't they? How many times have people protested violently against the ahmadiyya?


There's a huge difference when people protest and when the government persecutes.

Quote:
This is an incident which is rarely ever heard of in the West committed by Christians, and in Turkey of all places.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6568911.stm


In what way is that government sanctioned violence?

Quote:
Yes, the vigilante justice that occurred after 9/11 was an event which brought animals into the spotlight. But it is not a common thing, in fact it is isolated to that event, while muslims who convert outside of their faith are arrested or murdered by their own people. However, such "justice" was not what I had in mind in my posts and you should have understood that. If that was the case, then the converts to Islam post-9/11, and there have been many, would have been shot dead already, when you consider that the men were killed for appearing middle eastern/muslim, and not for converting.

The fact that missionaries are allowed in some Islamic countries is one, the fact that they can't acquire converts or spread the "gospel" is another. This is what I meant about pluralism. In the west you won't find Islamic proselytizers being arrested or banning the selling of Qur'ans, or the destruction of Mosques just because they don't follow the religion of the majority. Is there discrimination? Yes, but the same laws discriminate against Christians.


They're not allowed in some Muslim countries, they're allowed in most. The fact that they haven't been able to acquire a significant number of converts is due to their failure. Outside the gulf states, persecution is rare.

Quote:
You see the propaganda from the Muslims in the west, haven't you? There have been protest near the remains of the twin towers where Muslims called for the destruction of America. There have been protests in Europe where Muslims can be seen spouting off ridiculous rhetoric against their host country. I want to see this in the Islamic world, and not by it being followed with military tanks running over the people.


The middle east ain't China.

marshall wrote:
Khan_Sama wrote:
No Muslim country shows direct intolerance, they just have restrictions imposed. For example, in the KSA, proselytizing and public display of non-Islamic religious material is illegal, but legal for personal use. The UAE also has the same laws, but allows construction of non-Muslim religious buildings with governmental approval. The same applies to all the Gulf countries, sans Iraq and Yemen, which are secular.

:lol: :roll: That's the best you can come up with. Hahahaha.

This is so sad. Denying freedom of speech to the competition is not tolerance.
It only serves to show that your religion is powerless without government/authority propping it up. If a religion was actually true you'd think it would be able to spread on its own merit without the need to place restrictions on the competition.


Yes, I agree it's sad. Again, outside the gulf, persecution is rare. The gulf does not have a high population, the only reason it represents the religious community is due to it being the centre of the faith. Islam is indeed the fastest growing faith in the world, confirmed by the vatican. I don't know about the US, but I do know that an average of 50-100 people convert to Islam per day in the UK.

Quote:
Quote:
I don't know about Christians murdering or arresting Muslim proselytizers, but there have been a few incidents in the US since 9/11 when a few Sikhs have been murdered by people mistaking them as Muslims. If that's not intolerance, what is?


There is a VERY important distinction here. These were ILLEGAL and CRIMINAL actions taken by specific individuals. These individuals are in prison now. This is not GOVERNMENT endorsed intolerance like you have in KSA and Iran.


Yes, I agree with you. However, I pointed out the general tolerance of the American community.

Quote:
Quote:
There are lots of people walking around naked in the west. They're known as nudists.

:lol: That’s just stupid. In most western countries that I’m aware of public nudity is illegal except in specific designated places.


Well, oscuria said that you'll all be mad if you were to parade around naked, and I pointed out that some of you do.

Quote:
Quote:
Honestly oscuria, I think that the image of the Islamic world that you have is that of a bunch of bearded men and women covered in black living in tents in oasis's and using camels for transport.

I’m not going to speak for oscuria, but I don’t think that at all. I don’t see Muslims as being any different from westerners in most cases. Just because I don’t approve of everything in Islamic culture doesn’t mean I’m ignorant. I don’t approve of the Islamic religion because it’s promoted on fear and unconditional authority, things which are antithetical to my own philosophy. I don’t care much for Christianity either, mostly for the same reasons. Sorry.


A year ago, if you said the same thing to me, I would have agreed with you, but now my situation has changed. I realised that I need to fear Allah in order to prevent myself from doing sinful things.