Sky Dancer
Rookie
- Jan 21, 2009
- 19,307
- 1,320
- 0
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #41
Well that isnt very helpful, Why would anyone have a positive bias toward a genocidal ideology?
Terrorism is a genocidal ideology. Islam is not, as a whole. Do some terrorists use religious rhetoric to justify their violence, yes.
Dominionists in America use Biblical references to justify their position that the US should be a Christian theocracy.
That doesn't mean that Christian theocracy and poltical activism is a Christian teaching. It depends on how it's interpreted.
The same is true for Islam. I get the impression some posters would like me to be prejudiced against the religion of Islam and Muslims.
I have a hard enough time overcoming the negative biases I already have without taking on new ones, lol.
So, Sky, how do you explain having extreme negative biases in some aspects yet you're so willing to be accepting of other religions such as Islam and give it the benefit of the doubt? Why are you at two opposite ends of the spectrum with Christianity and Islam whenever Islam in today's world is clearly the more violent of the two? It doesn't make any logical sense?
I don't understand what you mean in the sentence I highlighted in your post.
I have known Sufi Muslims and they were peaceful and loving. I read Sufi poetry and find it inspiring and compatible with Buddhism.
I don't care for fundamentalism, whether it's Muslim or Christian. I love Christian and Sufi mystics.
I don't give the Taliban or Sharia Law the benefit of the doubt. I give American Muslims the benefit of the doubt. The argument on this thread is about whether Islamic teachings are inherently bad or not. My stance is that the teachings themselves are NOT inherently bad.
Literal interpretation and fundamentalism is problematic in my view, whether it's studying the Bible or the Q'uran.
I can't make that any clearer.
The other problem is when religion and politics are mixed with the goal of elevating one groups rights over another.