A Confused Muslim

[noveras]

Hello there,
I am a Muslim and a devoted on too meaning not a part time Muslim. I love to study religions of the world because when I study other religions it just make my believe in Islam stronger.

My journey in understanding other monotheistic religion which is Christianity and Judaism has made me to meet,have conversation and debate with people from this two believes.

Islam as most westerner believes no matter if they are atheist or not thinks that Islam is the religion of terror and all the bad things you can imagine in this world.Right now I'm just confused why people hated Islam so much and at the same time they never even meet a real Muslim even once in their life.

For example one of the most famous bad thing about Islam that westerners love to say is Muslim believe that when they blow them self up they will go to heaven and will be accompanied with 70 virgins.I have finished reading the Quran at a very young age and since than I have re read countless of time and not even once I come across something like that.

The first time I heard such a thing is when a Christian friend of mine asked me whether this is true and when I asked her where she heard this lies she said it is what the pastor in her church said to them. I am just can't believe that people are learning about Islam from someone who is not a Muslim them self.

I'm also puzzled why Muslim are associate to terrorist. The United Nation recognize IRA (Ireland Republic Army) and the Tamil Tiger (an arm group in Sri Lanka) as terrorist group and they attacked civilian and they blew them self up but the IRA are not seen as Christian terrorist and the Tamil Tiger are not seen as Hindu terrorist even thou they are known to killed both Muslim and Christian in Sri Lanka.

So why people who doesn't know Islam at all hate it so much and why it is given such a bad reputation when there are many more terrorist group which its members are not Muslim?

[Kaisada]

It's just like how Christianity is infamous for homophobia, even though there are many accepting Christians out there. It's just that a few extremely "out-there" groups (Phelps..) happen to be representing this faith, which can turn many people off before they even give the proper rest of the community a chance.

Lack of adequate exposure and education, basically.

[BDF]

Because of the media, that's why Islam is hated in the West. And it is partially their own fault. More specifically, it is the fault of the Islam minority that thinks suicide bombing will gain them something. It's gained them nothing. In fact... they've disgraced the Islam religion and gained it hatred. If I was Islam myself I'd be ashamed of them. It's their fault. You can't blame the average person for obviously being stupid enough to believe everything the media prints about Islams and thinking that all Islams are suicide bombers without even knowing any properly.

Why is Islamic terrorism covered so much more in the media than terrorism on behalf of other religions? In my opinion because over the past 20 or so years (within the span of the current young generation), it's been the Islamic terrorists who have drawn the most attention to themselves by the 9/11 attacks, London bombings etc. IRA is a thing of the 70's, although very recently they've shown some activity again. Plus IRA is less about religion, more about them wanting to re-unite Northern Ireland with the rest of Ireland, or so they say. The truth is they probably don't know themselves why they do it, instead they've been brainwashed by stupid friends and relatives (who are also probably brainwashed) into thinking it's their "purpose in life"... so, they are fulfilling their so called "purpose in life" by achieving nothing in the end apart from injuring civilians mostly.

There are also theories that the USA somehow manipulates the media into creating an even worse image for Islams, so that the public feels it's justifiable for the US to interfere in Islam countries. Conspiracy theories however are infinite, so I ignore most of them.

Ultimately it all ends with peaceful people such as yourself in the Islam community having to bear the consequences for what Islamic terrorists have done, and families suffering the loss of relatives and friends. At least I'd think they'd care enough for their own people not to do this to themselves, but obviously they don't or they're really dumb, either way.

[Xujhan]

Originally Posted by Kaisada

It's just like how Christianity is infamous for homophobia, even though there are many accepting Christians out there. It's just that a few extremely "out-there" groups (Phelps..) happen to be representing this faith, which can turn many people off before they even give the proper rest of the community a chance.

Lack of adequate exposure and education, basically.

I don't know that I'd want to say that it's just a few. Certainly Phelps is on a level all his own, but many of the quieter religious people still do objectionable things in one way or another. There were enough in California to pass Prop 8, for example, and there are many states worse than California on that topic. There are many lovely Christians, yes, but there are also many less-than-lovely Christians, and the existance of the former can't excuse the actions of the latter.

More on topic but in a similar vein: events like Draw Muhammed Day and the recent burning of a Quran by Terry Jones have shown that a very significant portion of the Islamic world is neither peaceful nor tolerant. Whether they represent "true Islam" or not is really quite irrelevant, just as whether "true Christianity" includes homophobia is irrelevant. They identify as Muslim and there are more than enough of them to get people murdered in violent riots. These aren't the terrorists, mind you; they're the civillians.

[John 6:29]

I think it's just stereotypes of the more conservative Americans, who are generally older, and listen to nothing but fox news and take it as infallible truth. My general perception of Muslim's changed when I read various things from Bawa Muhaiyaddeen.

[BDF]

Originally Posted by mewithYou

I think it's just stereotypes of the more conservative Americans, who are generally older, and listen to nothing but fox news and take it as infallible truth. My general perception of Muslim's changed when I read various things from Bawa Muhaiyaddeen.

I'm thankful I grew up in a school of very mixed races. Although most people there were assholes I learnt that it was little to do with which race they were from.

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by noveras

I am a Muslim and a devoted on too meaning not a part time Muslim. I love to study religions of the world because when I study other religions it just make my believe in Islam stronger.

Are you learning of other religions for what they are and to study them in detail or are you learning of the religions so you can refute them all? It seems to be the latter, so you're learning of religions to strengthen your belief, you're not learning of religions theologically.

Originally Posted by noveras

I am just can't believe that people are learning about Islam from someone who is not a Muslim them self.

I'm not Islamic but I don't need a Muslim to teach me about Islam. The Internet, books, videos and possibly certain TV programs can provide informative correct information. For example, when I learned of theistic Satanism, I didn't learn it all from a theistic Satanist. I went and found various websites, books, chatted with people who knew more of it, etc... . I still do this to learn of it. There's no need to learn Islam from a Muslim.

Originally Posted by noveras

I'm also puzzled why Muslim are associate to terrorist. The United Nation recognize IRA (Ireland Republic Army) and the Tamil Tiger (an arm group in Sri Lanka) as terrorist group and they attacked civilian and they blew them self up but the IRA are not seen as Christian terrorist and the Tamil Tiger are not seen as Hindu terrorist even thou they are known to killed both Muslim and Christian in Sri Lanka.

Neither the IRA nor Tamil Tiger are religions, so you're straw-manning.

Originally Posted by noveras

So why people who doesn't know Islam at all hate it so much and why it is given such a bad reputation when there are many more terrorist group which its members are not Muslim?

A minority of the religion acted as terrorists, which everyone gets emotional about. Once they realize such terrorists were Islamic, they associate Islam with terrorists. It's ignorance on their part but blame also rests with the Islams who did such acts. Additionally, the events are more recent so it's in the media more. The IRA officially ended in the 1920s, so many people haven't heard of it and the media has no reason to bring them back up.

[BDF]

Originally Posted by The Man And XX Master

Neither the IRA nor Tamil Tiger are religions, so you're straw-manning.

IRA is about re-uniting North Ireland with the rest of Ireland. North Ireland belongs to UK. UK = protestant. Ireland = catholic. It's an old thing going on between protestants and catholics. Naturally any difference those extremists can find between Ireland and UK (including religious beliefs) is exploited and used to justify their idiocy. So in some respect IRA is slightly about religion, it obviously isn't a religion itself. Same way Al-queda isn't a religion, but is religiously motivated.

Originally Posted by The Man And XX Master

A minority of the religion acted as terrorists, which everyone gets emotional about. Once they realize such terrorists were Islamic, they associate Islam with terrorists. It's ignorance on their part but blame also rests with the Islams who did such acts. Additionally, the events are more recent so it's in the media more. The IRA officially ended in the 1920s, so many people haven't heard of it and the media has no reason to bring them back up.

When people mention IRA, they generally speaking don't mean the one that ended in 1920, but the "Provisional IRA" that ended officially in 2005 I think. Unofficially they're still around. They are responsible for all kinds of bombings that went on in London in the 1970's and 1980's.

[ALLorNOTHINGforCHRIST]

Simply because it is in the media that the all are bad and out to harm everyone else, but I for one do not see Muslims that way.

[AnaMZ]

Actual terrorist acts carried out by minority groups within the Islamic faith. Ignorance of the religion itself. Different worldviews and morals. But mostly xenophobia. A Muslim (who is of Eastern origin) looks different, speaks a different language, dresses differently and sees the world a different way. We shouldn't let these things make us suspicious, but we do.

Well, that and the terrorism part.

[Epsilon]

The IRA isn't seen as a Christian Terrorist organization because their goal has nothing to do with their religion it has to do with Irish Nationalism. And the Tamil Tigers aren't seen as a Hindu terrorist group because their goal has nothing to do with Hindusim , it has everything to do with politics in Sri Lanka. The same cannot be said for many Islamic terrorists groups because their goals are religious in nature.

but if the IRA was composed of muslims, they wouldn't be islamic terrorists, they would still simply be IRA because their goal has nothing to do with religion.

[Jack]

I think the reason people are scared of Islam is not simply down to terrorism (although that is a factor) but also due to the actions of regular muslims as well. I'm sure anyone who has cared to read on the subject saw the reaction of regular muslims over Salman Rushdie's book "The Satanic Verses" and the reaction to the mildly insulting pictures of Muhammed printed in Danish newspapers. These were not the actions of a minority of terrorists but of regular islamic individuals who were determined to undermine the freedom of expression and freedom of speech of people whom they disagreed with.

The problem is that Islam is an inherently violent religion, much like Christianity before it underwent a period of moderation, and is therefore intimidating to those who would rather solve conflicts with logic and words. Of course, there are those that continuously claim that violent passages in the Qur'ān are simply taken out of context and in some instance they are completely correct. However, there are plenty of questionable passages, and some if not directly questionable some seem to be less savoury when actually looked into. While, some interpretations of the passages could be peaceful I can certainly see how they could be interpreted violently as well (after all there is always going to be debate by scholars as to the meanings of religious texts).

It is the reaction of everyday Muslims which seems to frighten most people more than terrorism. The generally intimidating and inflamatory (including flag burning etc etc) protests for the introduction of Sharia law into secular states and a general lack of tolerance, often resulting in violence, for anything which goes against their religious views makes many people slightly wary of the religion. Of course, I'm not claiming that all Islamic people are violent or that you can't be a good muslim without violence in much the same way as I wouldn't say you can't be a good Christian without stoning adulterers or killing disobedient children. I'm merely pointing out that there are plenty of violent passages of the qu'ran and I'm sick of people saying it's "the religion of peace".

[dr2005]

Originally Posted by Jack

I think the reason people are scared of Islam is not simply down to terrorism (although that is a factor) but also due to the actions of regular muslims as well. I'm sure anyone who has cared to read on the subject saw the reaction of regular muslims over Salman Rushdie's book "The Satanic Verses" and the reaction to the mildly insulting pictures of Muhammed printed in Danish newspapers. These were not the actions of a minority of terrorists but of regular islamic individuals who were determined to undermine the freedom of expression and freedom of speech of people whom they disagreed with.

The problem is that Islam is an inherently violent religion, much like Christianity before it underwent a period of moderation, and is therefore intimidating to those who would rather solve conflicts with logic and words. Of course, there are those that continuously claim that violent passages in the Qur'ān are simply taken out of context and in some instance they are completely correct. However, there are plenty of questionable passages, and some if not directly questionable some seem to be less savoury when actually looked into. While, some interpretations of the passages could be peaceful I can certainly see how they could be interpreted violently as well (after all there is always going to be debate by scholars as to the meanings of religious texts).

It is the reaction of everyday Muslims which seems to frighten most people more than terrorism. The generally intimidating and inflamatory (including flag burning etc etc) protests for the introduction of Sharia law into secular states and a general lack of tolerance, often resulting in violence, for anything which goes against their religious views makes many people slightly wary of the religion. Of course, I'm not claiming that all Islamic people are violent or that you can't be a good muslim without violence in much the same way as I wouldn't say you can't be a good Christian without stoning adulterers or killing disobedient children. I'm merely pointing out that there are plenty of violent passages of the qu'ran and I'm sick of people saying it's "the religion of peace".

With all due respect, I disagree in the strongest possible terms with a lot of what you are claiming above, and that is not something which happens very often. I object in particular to the following claims:

• That those who protested violently against the publication of "The Satanic Verses" or the Muhammad cartoons were in fact representative of "regular" Muslims, for which you provide no evidence (opinion polls, community statements etc.);
• That those protesting were determined to undermine freedom of expression and freedom of speech, for which again you provide no evidence and I am quite surprised you would make such a claim given such attempts at restriction are actionable in law;
• That Islam is an inherently violent religion, for which aside from a vague reference to "questionable passages" you again provide no evidence for, goes well beyond pointing out it has "violent passages" and which it appears is expected to be taken at face value; and
• The implicit claim that Sharia law is desired by Muslims, which having met and befriended Muslims at university - one of whom I would call one of my best friends - I can quite easily assure you they certainly do not.

By no means do I seek to absolve those Muslims who do violate the rights of others and carry out wanton acts of violence supposedly in the name of God - they should quite rightly be condemned and punished for their actions. However, I would humbly request that a little perspective is remembered at times, as quite frankly this is rapidly turning into scapegoat territory and making it out as if they deserve this treatment. I do not believe that is what you are suggesting but it is not much further down the line of thought.

Apologies if that comes across a bit strong, but I hope you appreciate I object to a lack of evidence to support your claims as much as anything else.

[Xujhan]

Originally Posted by dr2005

That those who protested violently against the publication of "The Satanic Verses" or the Muhammad cartoons were in fact representative of "regular" Muslims, for which you provide no evidence (opinion polls, community statements etc.)

This seems to be a defense you use very often. I'm curious: how prolific does an opinion have to be before you'll cease labeling it as fringe extremism? If you're asking for hard numbers, it's only fair to say first what numbers would convince you to change your mind.

[BDF]

After reading more posts another thing struck me.

Christianity generally speaking "belongs" in Europe, North America, and parts of South America. That's mostly pretty developed countries. You could say Christianity has been "updated" in its customs and traditions. Christianity used to be very extreme too, burning people alive and shit like that, but it had to change if it was to be seen as acceptable in developed modern countries.

Most other major religions have developed in more deprived countries. They simply haven't evolved to accept modern customs. Some go further than that, and reject and condemn modern customs thinking they are the "product" of Christianity. Modern customs, ways of life etc. includes stuff like freedom of speech, less tolerance for violence, equality for men and women. I know for a fact that a lot of traditional Islams have a screwed up view of women. They talk and act like it is literally a woman's job to wipe their ass if they ask them to. That kind of behaviour makes them undesirable.

I'll quote an example, from personal experience. My mum (who actually owns the house) called a specialist company up to do with some water/electrical fault in our house. The guy that showed up was muslim, no problem. It was me, my stepdad, and my mum in the house. Me and my stepdad knew nothing about the problem, yet he completely refused to talk to my mum, and kept asking "where's your husband" and was getting aggressive. My mum then threatened him with sending a complaint with a recording of what happened to his employers, and then he became totally the opposite, and started cooperating. He just gave the impression that he's the type to go back to his home in the evening and beat his wife up because "some woman" answered him back when he was on his job.

Those kind of people aren't terrorists. They're just assholes. If they won't accept 21st century life the way it is in EU and America, then they should go back to wherever they came from instead of expecting our countries to evolve around a minority of close minded fools.

[dr2005]

Originally Posted by Xujhan

This seems to be a defense you use very often. I'm curious: how prolific does an opinion have to be before you'll cease labeling it as fringe extremism? If you're asking for hard numbers, it's only fair to say first what numbers would convince you to change your mind.

The fairly traditional 50% plus 1, or absolute majority, tends to do for me quite nicely. If you're going to claim something as being a mainstream majority opinion - which is what Jack was suggesting in his post - you need to at the very least demonstrate it as such. That isn't anything particularly unusual, just basic statistics, and it's the same standard I apply to all claims of majority opinion. So, to bring this back on thread, were there evidence that such people represented the majority opinion on the matter then I will accept it.

[Xujhan]

Originally Posted by dr2005

The fairly traditional 50% plus 1, or absolute majority, tends to do for me quite nicely. If you're going to claim something as being a mainstream majority opinion - which is what Jack was suggesting in his post - you need to at the very least demonstrate it as such. That isn't anything particularly unusual, just basic statistics, and it's the same standard I apply to all claims of majority opinion. So, to bring this back on thread, were there evidence that such people represented the majority opinion on the matter then I will accept it.

So (hypothetically) if 45% of American Christians were on record as believing that gays should be stoned to death, that would still be a problem with fringe extremism and not indicative of a problem with Christianity itself?

[dr2005]

Originally Posted by Xujhan

So (hypothetically) if 45% of American Christians were on record as believing that gays should be stoned to death, that would still be a problem with fringe extremism and not indicative of a problem with Christianity itself?

Bear in mind Christianity currently has membership around the 2 billion mark, and that a 2008 opinion poll placed the proportion of Americans identifying as Christians as 76% (Source) which gives roughly 236m out of a population of 311m (assuming the figures have not declined further), and you end up with 106m out of 2 billion taking that view, which translates as 5%. That would still qualify as fringe by most definitions. I take your point, however, and apologise for misreading your original question (brain fade strikes again). I would suspect I would stop calling it "fringe" extremism around the 20% mark or thereabouts, although I would still stop short of calling it majority opinion until 50%+1 occurs. I don't place much stead in pluralities.

[Fictional]

People in the west tend to view Islam as bad because that's the only view of it that's presented over here. Terrorist attacks get reported because they get people's attention; sadly, being nice isn't as effenctive n attention-grabber as being nasty. Also, the RIRA are viewed as terrorists by the vast majoraty of people that I know. Also, it would seem that when religions are around 1200 years old, they go through phases of extremism, if you will. There were the Christian crusades and the 1200s (of was that the 1300s, I'm not entirely sure); Islam would seem to be at that point in it's development now. Also, you do every now and then hear about atrocities agianst women in Muslim countries, though those are actually caused - for the large part - by mysogony than religion; again though, the media will report something negative over something positive is it'll sell more newspapers.

Hope that's helped ^^

[angelicpsyco]

I will tell you why....keep in mind these are not my veiws....and that i think middle eastern people are some of the most beautiful and good people.......before 911 not many new what the nation of islam is.....whenwe aquired our first perception of islam it was only bombings and killing people because of religion....thats all america has known about it......since there was nothing but negitive association and no positive, people began to hate......simple ass that...and all people who are in the army that claim to be cristians are blasphemers.....the bible says thou shalt not kill and should love thy neighboor and give even if it is your last......they kill and fight....creating intense hate instead of love.....war is stupid!!!!!.....you will not create real peace by means of war....maybe tempoary.....but some group will hate you for killing there people and will hate you and possibly create hate violence..........I am a christian.....to be specific jehovahs witness...if u wanna learn more message me

[Jennifer]

Salam. I am also a Muslim but haven't been one my whole life. The reason why society has this Islomophobia as I'd call it is because they are afraid of what they don't understand they're into hearing what other people say and can't look it up themselves. Google doesn't solve anything for anyone when it comes to religion they must go straight to the horses mouth instead.

[Xujhan]

Originally Posted by Jennifer

Salam. I am also a Muslim but haven't been one my whole life. The reason why society has this Islomophobia as I'd call it is because they are afraid of what they don't understand they're into hearing what other people say and can't look it up themselves. Google doesn't solve anything for anyone when it comes to religion they must go straight to the horses mouth instead.

Because people will necessarily give a thoroughly unbaised summary of their own religion?

[BDF]

Originally Posted by Jennifer

Salam. I am also a Muslim but haven't been one my whole life. The reason why society has this Islomophobia as I'd call it is because they are afraid of what they don't understand they're into hearing what other people say and can't look it up themselves. Google doesn't solve anything for anyone when it comes to religion they must go straight to the horses mouth instead.

I hate being prejudice, and if I judge people I limit my judgement to my personal experience of them. I don't look to the media usually to make my mind up on a group of people.

My impressions of a lot of Islams is they hate western culture and degrade women a lot (in summary). British people also have their downsides... let's face it, a huge number of us are lazy as hell, that's why Polish workers keep snatching our jobs from us and all we can do is moan about it. No one's perfect. None of these generalisations apply to the whole culture of either group, but a significant number.

I understand what I see and hear perfectly, in my own interpretation of it, but am also aware there's a lot of things I don't necessarily know/haven't experienced... some things that I'll just never see from another person's point of view, and so never fully understand, like the apparent prejudice Islam shows towards women. I have a few friends who are ethnically arab, and they're my friends not because I'm "trying to be good" and defy my slight prejudice against certain types of people, but because they are completely different from the stereotypical muslim.

Lets cut the crap. I'm prejudice against assholes. I figured it out, finally.

[Power Cosmic]

I've been resisting the urge to post here for a while, but okay, I'll get this out of my system. I was raised as a muslim up until I figured out it was bollocks at around age 8-9.

And the culture is horrible, negative and served to seemingly-permanatly destroy my self-esteem, self-worth and screw up my social skills at a young age by having me isolated. The whole culture with how children are treated alone is wrong on a hundred different levels...hell, I could be a poster child. But even more, my female cousin who's the same age as me...she got it a hundred times worse. Why? Because she has ovaries.
I mean, we both kinda hit the bottle hard during high school in an attempt to get away from the authoritarian nightmare of the situation, and whilst this wasn't the best idea by a long shot, what else did you expect, we were young and arbirtarily being told that the misguided whims of often senile elders was the be all and end all of our existances.
For example, one my great aunt was downright bullying my Mum, telling her that she was a crap mother for basically not being even more strict and authoritarian over me and that I shouldn't be allowed to sit on the computer or grow my hair and I should study and read the Quaran like a good little puppet. I was about 16 at the time and didn't appreciate this wrinkled, senile old hag being horrible to my mother, especially since the little freedoms I did get willingly from my Mum, I appreciated so much. And whilst I might not get on with her that much, she's still my Mum, and I couldn't stand watching her getting mocked and humiliated in front of her whole family plus about five or six guests/extended family.

So basically I told the old woman exactly what I thought, not holding back on the swears, what I thought of her intelligence, wisdom and usefulness as a person and more.
Needless to say, there was a complete uproar and my great aunt's son's were ready to go for my throat, but I didn't back off an inch. Then my Dad dragged me to my room, semi-literally and my Mum shouted at me for being 'disrespectful' =/.

They're so backwards and this is just the TIP of the fucking iceberg. I have a whole bloody lifetime of experiences to draw upon here, nothing but betrayals, mindfuckery, and them trying their very very very best to make me another mind slave to their crumbling tradition and it's arbitrary whims. I had real paranoia problems when I was 15.

Put it this way, I trusted my own family so little, that I was downright scared to eat the meals they cooked since I was worried they'd have put in mind-control or conformacy enforcement drugs. So I tried to eat away from home as much as possible and even then, only in my room away from everyone else. I even kept an array of knives and even an actual sword stashed around in case I was attacked in my room and even had a system where what appeared to be litter on the floor of the room was actually strategically placed items that'd tell me if anyone had been in my room whilst I was away at school, since the lock to my room could be picked way too easily.

Now think what kind of environment a child has to grow up in to have to think like that. I mean, I didn't even realise this was unusual until I left home for uni and started to reassert control over my life again.

The religion is about as wrong as every single other one, which could be good or bad depending on your views, but the culture? That ones a right clusterfuck of backwards values where conformity and being a complete slave to the whims of your elders is how you define your life and if you don't, you're worthless =/.

[Xujhan]

Originally Posted by The Odinson

*life story*

You are a gentleman and a scholar Janos; never let anyone tell you otherwise. <3

[Power Cosmic]

Thanks dude, I really appreciate it =).

I mean, not all of my family were/are bad. My Dad whilst really strict grew up in England and hence was a bit of a moderating influence, plus my cousin I mentioned and a few others in the family thought like I did, and hence we occasionally made alibis for each other and there was some support and stuff.

It was still bit messed up though...I mean, put it this way, it was recently my little brother's 18th birthday. He did nothing for it. Nothing at all. And when I asked him via the phone why not his reply was "Well, what can I do? =/" (Well, he didn't pronounce '=/' but that represents his tone >.> )...

But yeah...cheers, I do appreciate what you said.