About TheReligionofPeace.com

[Sky Dancer]

Muslims in the US live in peace with their neighbors.

In India, even in the interior villages, all the Hindu and Muslim communities used to live very peacefully by establishing a relationship between them. The young men called the elderly members of the village by the name cācā or kākā, "uncle," and men of the same age called each other dādā, "brother." The relationship was very friendly. There were even invitations from Muslim houses to Hindu houses and from Hindu houses to Muslim houses. Both the Hindus and the Muslims accepted the invitations to go to one another's houses to attend ceremonial functions. Even until fifty or sixty years ago, the relationship between Hindus and Muslims was very friendly, and there were no disturbances. We do not find any Hindu-Muslim riots in the history of India, even during the days of the Muslims' rule over the country. Conflict between Hindus and Muslims was created by polluted politicians, especially foreign rulers, and thus the situation gradually became so degraded that India was divided into Hindustan and Pakistan.

 

[logical4u]

Muslims in the US live in peace with their neighbors.

In India, even in the interior villages, all the Hindu and Muslim communities used to live very peacefully by establishing a relationship between them. The young men called the elderly members of the village by the name cācā or kākā, "uncle," and men of the same age called each other dādā, "brother." The relationship was very friendly. There were even invitations from Muslim houses to Hindu houses and from Hindu houses to Muslim houses. Both the Hindus and the Muslims accepted the invitations to go to one another's houses to attend ceremonial functions. Even until fifty or sixty years ago, the relationship between Hindus and Muslims was very friendly, and there were no disturbances. We do not find any Hindu-Muslim riots in the history of India, even during the days of the Muslims' rule over the country. Conflict between Hindus and Muslims was created by polluted politicians, especially foreign rulers, and thus the situation gradually became so degraded that India was divided into Hindustan and Pakistan.

Didn't mention "individuals" (that are outnumbered by "non-believers), asked for communities. An if you spoke with 'neighbors' of muslims (yes, even in this country), you will find that SOME are being harrassed by their muslim neighbors and the resale values of the homes in the neighborhood are being dimished purposefully by muslims intent on taking the neighborhood for their own (that doesn't sound very neighborly, does it?).

There was an article last week talking about Indian Hindus being persecuted by muslims on the Bangledesh border. The muslims are raping and terrorizing the Hinu women into submiting to Sharia law (one would think the muslims would appreciate the Hindus modesty). There is real fear that islam will take India within a couple of decades: the Hindus will be "converted, murdered, or forced to live as second class citizens". But that will be acceptable in you book because you know a few good muslims and ignore that those that practice Sharia want the reins of power over every nation on earth.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Muslims in the US live in peace with their neighbors.

In India, even in the interior villages, all the Hindu and Muslim communities used to live very peacefully by establishing a relationship between them. The young men called the elderly members of the village by the name cācā or kākā, "uncle," and men of the same age called each other dādā, "brother." The relationship was very friendly. There were even invitations from Muslim houses to Hindu houses and from Hindu houses to Muslim houses. Both the Hindus and the Muslims accepted the invitations to go to one another's houses to attend ceremonial functions. Even until fifty or sixty years ago, the relationship between Hindus and Muslims was very friendly, and there were no disturbances. We do not find any Hindu-Muslim riots in the history of India, even during the days of the Muslims' rule over the country. Conflict between Hindus and Muslims was created by polluted politicians, especially foreign rulers, and thus the situation gradually became so degraded that India was divided into Hindustan and Pakistan.

Didn't mention "individuals" (that are outnumbered by "non-believers), asked for communities. An if you spoke with 'neighbors' of muslims (yes, even in this country), you will find that SOME are being harrassed by their muslim neighbors and the resale values of the homes in the neighborhood are being dimished purposefully by muslims intent on taking the neighborhood for their own (that doesn't sound very neighborly, does it?).

There was an article last week talking about Indian Hindus being persecuted by muslims on the Bangledesh border. The muslims are raping and terrorizing the Hinu women into submiting to Sharia law (one would think the muslims would appreciate the Hindus modesty). There is real fear that islam will take India within a couple of decades: the Hindus will be "converted, murdered, or forced to live as second class citizens". But that will be acceptable in you book because you know a few good muslims and ignore that those that practice Sharia want the reins of power over every nation on earth.

For the last sixty years in India, Hindus and Muslims have fought. Prior to that time, they had periods of time when they peacefully co-existed in India. If your view is Muslims are more belligerent people by nature I can't join you. Ahmadiiyya Muslims are peaceful.

 

[Ropey]

This is the ebb and flow of "Countering Radical Islam" Sky Dancer. (Radical Islam is read "All Must Submit".)

The problem with periods of time when Islam has had more acceptance of others, and a more relative peace in those times is that there are were also many periods of time when Islam did not show acceptance of others.

This is when they warred heavily and what followed their warring on others was periods of relative peace. History proves out that the flow was fought and the ebb was left to its own devices.

 

[Sky Dancer]

This is the ebb and flow of "Countering Radical Islam" Sky Dancer. (Radical Islam is read "All Must Submit".)

The problem with periods of time when Islam has had more acceptance of others, and a more relative peace in those times is that there are were also many periods of time when Islam did not show acceptance of others.

This is when they warred heavily and what followed their warring on others was periods of relative peace. History proves out that the flow was fought and the ebb was left to its own devices.

The point I make is if there were periods of acceptance of others it can happen again. It means the religion and it's people are not INHERENTLY violent, intolerant or evil.

 

[Ropey]

People are inherently violent Sky Dancer. We fight against this all of our lives. It is the reason for free will.

Not books. People.

 

[Sky Dancer]

People are inherently violent Sky Dancer. We fight against this all of our lives. It is the reason for free will.

Not books. People.

That's YOUR religious POV, not mine. Yours is that people are inherently violent. Mine is that all beings have buddha nature. Violence and hatred are adventitious, not inherent.

 

[Ropey]

And so we both beg to differ. That's fine. You can not prove you are correct any more than I can prove I am.

So, we differ.

This is why you and I seldom see eye to eye. We are of two completely differing views. But that's fine. There's room enough for us all. Here in North America at any rate.

So far.

 

[Sky Dancer]

We are not completely different Ropey. You are a decent human being with a good heart. So am I.

That we come to that from different religious perspectives is less important.

 

[Ropey]

I said we beg to differ Sky Dancer. No where did I say we completely differ, but this is the reason why our views are so different.

Our morality of belief notwithstanding.

Which is what you just said as well.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Sigh. Never mind, Ropey.

 

[Ropey]

Sigh. Never mind, Ropey.

Even when I paraphrase your own words back to you. I paraphrased you and agreed with you.

Then you sigh.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Sigh. Never mind, Ropey.

Even when I paraphrase your own words back to you. I paraphrased you and agreed with you.

Then you sigh.

"You are a decent human being with a good heart. So am I."

This is what I said.

 

[Ropey]

Sigh. Never mind, Ropey.

Even when I paraphrase your own words back to you. I paraphrased you and agreed with you.

Then you sigh.

"You are a decent human being with a good heart. So am I."

This is what I said.

"Our morality of belief notwithstanding" implies that one can be of good mind regardless of the belief of religion. Many atheists are good minded people who live exemplary lives..

Which is what you said.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Even when I paraphrase your own words back to you. I paraphrased you and agreed with you.

Then you sigh.

"You are a decent human being with a good heart. So am I."

This is what I said.

"Our morality of belief notwithstanding" implies that one can be of good mind regardless of the belief of religion. Many atheists are good minded people who live exemplary lives..

Which is what you said.

"You are a decent human being with a good heart. So am I."

This is what I said.


It is the main point of my post which you seem to have missed.

 

[Ropey]

Not at all Sky Dancer. I do not see it as all that important a discussion point. I am more concerned with the acts, not the beliefs.

That's just me.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Never mind. I don't hold grudges. That may be one way we differ. I'm not an eternalist. That's another. You'd rather focus on differences than find common ground. OK.

 

[Ropey]

And you would rather spend your time philosophizing of the minds belief whilst many die on the ground. OK.

To each their own.

Never mind. I don't hold grudges. That may be one way we differ. I'm not an eternalist. That's another. You'd rather focus on differences than find common ground. OK.

Why would you be holding a grudge anyway? What have I posted to you that would have grudge appeal?

Seriously.

 

[Sky Dancer]

And you would rather spend your time philosophizing of the minds belief whilst many die on the ground. OK.

To each their own.

I'm talking about how you and I relate to each other in discussing the topic but it' ok that you missed that or aren't interested.

Regarding Islam. I'm not a warrior. I'm a Buddhist. Buddhists are non-violent. I will always be seeking peace and common ground with those I differ from.

You seem to prefer fighting.

 

[Ropey]

And you would rather spend your time philosophizing of the minds belief whilst many die on the ground. OK.

To each their own.

I'm talking about how you and I relate to each other in discussing the topic but it' ok that you missed that or aren't interested.

Regarding Islam. I'm not a warrior. I'm a Buddhist. Buddhists are non-violent. I will always be seeking peace and common ground with those I differ from.

You seem to prefer fighting.

Yes. Seek all you will. There are those who sought peace with so many others.

Then came the war. On the ground. Often times whilst the peace conferences were still in play.

Who you are doesn't make much of a matter to me one way or the other. It's not about your belief or my belief.

For me it's about what is happening on the ground with Islam, and how many do not see it as a religion of peace.

You just keep seeking.