Via the Athens News
PAKISTANI immigrants in the western Athens suburb of Nea Ionia appear to have lost their fight to stop the closure of their unlicensed mosque.
Deputy Athens Prefect Haroula Kefalidou said it is only a matter of time before Muslims are evicted from the basement they converted into a mosque
I have been following the Mosque Debate since the beginning of this blog. I still can’t believe that nothing has moved forward with the plans to build a mosque in Athens (the ONLY European capital without one). We are witnessing the growing frustration among Muslims in the city who are being denied a place to worship, mostly because of objections from the powerful Greek Orthodox lobby. Remember, Greece has no separation of church and state. Now we are seeing local residents joining forces against a group of people who just want a place to practice their religion.
All we want is somewhere decent to hold our prayers,” he said. “We do not want to disturb anyone. If we want to hold a memorial for a loved one who dies, where should we do this? We don’t have enough space in our homes.”
Last month, hundreds of Pakistanis marched through the streets of Nea Ionia to protest the eviction, which underscores the fact that Athens is the only European Union capital without an official mosque
Instead of working on building relations and dialogue between the various different religions, Greece seems to be going down a dangerous road, creating tension, resentment and anger. And we all know where that leads.
Why not build a mosque in a central area of Athens and work on building good community links with the residents and worshipers? It could be a real opportunity for education and understanding. It could be a positive step towards community building. It is almost too late for this to be the case here but I still have hope even though it is fading fast.
Technorati Tags: greece, athens, mosque, muslim, religion, faith
Religious Symbols on January 18th, 2010
Crucifixes in School on December 22nd, 2009
Religious Icons on November 25th, 2009
Religious Symbols on November 13th, 2009
A Mosque in Athens ? on October 9th, 2009
Loading...
Here in my country, we have a problem with mosques built without permission nor legal papers from the local government. What’s worse is that the people who built it surrounded the local church with vendors who illegally put up tents where they can sell their merchandise.
I’m not sure how to call this anymore
Internet Business Review,
Where do you live? There must be laws against the illegal vendors? I think many authorities in Europe are rightly wary of denying religious freedoms but I don’t think that the selling of religious items illegally constitutes a denial of the freedom to practice a religion. If someone is acting illegally, it should be acted upon, regardless of religion.
Great post Travlos, thanks for pouring light on the political and religious culture in Greece.
It’s inconceivable in this day and age, that a country in Europe can deny a place of worship for Muslims to practice their religion.
Maybe the Greek government fears unleashing the same Islamophobic hysteria seen among the public in other European capitals?
Islamophobia has taken root massively among the population in my country (UK) since the authorities provided government grants for the building of mosques in London, Birmingham and other cities across the UK.
Many Brits perceive that Muslims “are taking over” and blame Muslims for all the ills in British society, from stealing jobs from the “indigenous Brits” to “getting Council houses as soon as they come off the banana boat”.
Many Brits use the old chestnut that “the Muslims want to attack the West because of our decadence”. If that was true, why have Muslim terrorists not targetted Amsterdam, the capital of vice and decadence?
The racists will use all kinds of ill-conceived reasons to justify their hatred of the “other”.
British Islamophobia basically boils down to racism.
You only have to consider the public reaction in the UK when NATO saved the Bosnian Muslims from annihilation in the Yugoslav War. Most of us thought it was right to act to save the Bosnian Muslims because they are as white as we are. But when Ethiopian Muslims or Sudanese Muslims are being killed, we are strangely silent.
We don’t even care when Palestinian or Iraqi CHRISTIANS are killed or denied their rights – we couldn’t care less about them because British society considers them as different shades of “black”, whether they’re Muslims or Christian matters little. Racism at it’s purest i’m afraid.
If you distill it long enough, all Islamophobia boils down to racism. Especially in British society.
Travlos,
If “European Islam” means European Muslims practising a “moderate Islam”, it does exist.
The majority of Muslims in the UK (and in other EU countries) are moderate Muslims, and I believe that Islam is fundamentally a moderate religion. There are a minority of Muslims who fall prey to extremist propaganda but you find extremists in any religion ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....p;index=16 )
Just as Muslims can fall prey to Islamic propaganda, Westerners can fall prey to distortions of Islam and Muslim in the Western media. I think the level of Islamophobia in Britain and America is frightening – it is based on ignorance and is cultivated by sensationalist media reporting with buzzwords like “Islamofascism”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related
Many Americans were anti-Obama based solely on his midlle name sounding islamic: “Barack HUSSEIN Obama”. The level of ignorance and anti-Muslim hysteria in America is truly frightening:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related
And as always, it’s always the minority Muslim extremists that make the news bulletins, never the majority moderate Muslims who go about their lives in a peaceful and respectful way.
A group of 20-odd extremists holding up placards calling for the beheading of Danish cartoonists will always be considered much more newsworthy than the millions of Muslims who go about their daily lives quietly and respectfully like the rest of us.
Hello MIchael,
I live in the Philippines and here, the law of course does not permit this to happen but its the authorities who seem to not mind about it.
What’s worse is that the people who live in the mosques were doing illegal things like pickpocketing, illegal collection of money to busses and more.
What I want to know is this:
Why should an Orthodox Greek care about Muslims being able to freely practice their religion in Athens when Christians living in Islamic societies are, much more often than not, DENIED freedom of religion?
Islamic societies have never been able to live in peace with their neighbors because Islam seeks to dominate these groups and to bring them into the “dar al islam.”
Greece is actually very lucky to have a strong religious establishment. Look what has happened in the UK. The Archbishop of Canterbury even seems to have positive views about allowing the barbarism of Sharia law in the UK.
If Muslims want to live in Greece or anywhere else in Europe they will need to accept their second class status…which is precisely what Islam gives its religious minorities.
Miss, are you saying that because other countries are crap, Greece can be too? How can you say that anyone should accept “second class status” ? It would be terrible for Greece, which is a European (and supposedly first world) country to adopt this attitude, wouldn’t it ?
This is the lie of multiculturalism, Devious.
No, it wouldn’t be terrible at all. We absolutely do NOT need to give a mile to a barbarous group of totalitarians who won’t give an inch.
Look what’s happening in the UK. They were trying to do the “right thing” and it is backfiring bad. Why? ….because over and over again history has shown us that when Muslims get a toehold…they then try to take over. We don’t want there here in Greece. We had that once. NEVER AGAIN.
Yes, Greece has problems…racism, extreme ethnocentrism, corruption etc. However, we don’t have the kind of barbarism that you find in Islamic societies. Tell me. Why are people from Islamic societies struggling so hard to get out of them? Islam is an inferior system. As such we absolutely should NOT give it equal status.
We can tolerate a Muslim presence in Greece. However, they need to realize that they occupy something like a second class status because Greece is a CHRISTIAN country. Now, if they want to convert to Christiantity etc…they can be more fully accepted.
Btw, I’m not a big supporter of the Church here. However, in this case I think the Church is providing that necessary protection against Islamic expansionism. I don’t want to see Greece end up like the UK with locals being afraid to criticize Islam because they feel threatened by its “peaceful” adherents.
I recommend “Infidel” by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a former Muslim from Somalia.
Miss,
You said, “We don’t want them here in Greece. We had that once. Never again”. I’m curious to know what has happened in Greece to make you so Islamophobic?
I have no irrational fear of Islam.
Michael, you said above:
“I believe that Islam is fundamentally a moderate religion.”
Moderate? What gave you this idea?
The Quran is anything but a moderate book. From start to finish it’s a book about Muslims forcing themselves on non-Muslims and compelling them to submit to Islamic rule. Did you not read about how the “nice” Muslims got on with the Jews and the Pagans?
It’s hard to see how anyone who has read the Quran could come away with the idea that Islam is about peace. It’s a very worldly “religion” and the “peace” comes when you submit to them. That’s why apostasy is punishable by death. It’s treason against the state. What other religion has this?
Islam isn’t a religion. We don’t need to respect such an ideology.
As a woman I’m sickened by the idea that we in the west should EVER view Islam as a religion of peace.
The owner of this blog and several posters seem to be very concerned about human rights. Well, what about the rights of women?
Yeah…let’s bring sharia law to the west because….we’re nice guys! Yay!
“The Quran is anything but a moderate book.”
Are the Christian or Judaic Holy Books any more moderate than the Quran?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related
It’s the difference in how the books are perceived.
The Quran is to Islam as Jesus Christ is to Christianity.
Because of this it’s impossible for Muslims to read and understand the Quran the way Christians and Jews read and understand the Bible. For a Muslim to do so would make him/her an apostate.
This is what makes Islam dangerous. It’s not a religion in the sense that we in the west (or even in the east) understand religion.
Islam is a violent political ideology. This is why it proscribes death for apostasy. There is no freedom of conscience.
Now, given that….
Why should we in the west put it on an equal footing with western value systems when the people who live in these societies are struggling to get out of them? People freezing to death in refrigerated containers, dying from carbon monoxide poisoning etc. This blog is full of such stories. People trying to escape the hell of Islam for life in the Christian west.
These people need to be lifted OUT of Islam. We need to help them perceive Islam as the cause of their problems. Instead..in the misguided belief in multiculturalism…we are helping the oppressor!
Sorry…I meant prescribes death for apostasy LOL
Your two videos appear to have been made by Muslims in an attempt to point the finger and say, “See! We aren’t the only ones!”
The problem is that Christians and Jews don’t produce the same type of rotten societies that Muslims do. You rarely see Christians and Jews engaging in mass killings or even advocating it. You don’t see Christians and Jews producing one anti-democratic society after another. You don’t see people struggling to escape from Christian and Jewish societies.
Why?
Answer: Something is wrong with Islam. Terribly wrong.
A big part of the problem is that they see their holy book as pretty much….God. You can’t engage in Quranic criticism because such a book is above criticism. That’s not the way it is with the Bible.
Example:
When God says that it’s OK to beat your wife…what religious scholar can argue with that? After all, the Quran wasn’t written by men (according to Muslims) so the religious scholar can’t say that it reflects the values of the era etc. It was written by God himself.
Get it?
That’s the problem with Islam.
It’s very dangerous and anyone who likes freedom but continues engaging in fellow traveler-ism will be sorry.
Miss,
it’s not only Muslims who have identified violent and barbaric passages in Christian and Jewish texts. There are many non-Muslim biblical scholars who have studied Christian and Judaic texts in detail:
“… found 600 passages of explicit violence in the Hebrew Bible [a.k.a. Old Testament], 1000 verses where God’s own violent actions of punishment are described, 100 passages where God expressly commands others to kill people, and several stories where God irrationally kills or tries to kill for no apparent reason. Violence … is easily the most often mentioned activity in the Hebrew Bible.”
(Raymond Schwager)
The bottom line is, you will always find religious extremists who use their religion to further their political/ideological agendas. But the truth is, “moderates” make up the majority of any religion, including Islam.
“You rarely see Christians and Jews engaging in mass killings or even advocating it.”
The Crusades?
Spanish Inquisition?
California and Midwest slaying of Native Americans?
Buring of “Witches”?
Christopher Columbus? (the slave trader founder of the Americas): “..we hanged thirteen [natives] at a time in honor of Christ Our Savior and the twelve apostles… then, straw was wrapped around their torn bodies and they were burned alive.”?
200,000 slain during the forced ‘evangelisation’ of the phillipines 1898?
Boxer rebellion China?
Vasco De Gama in India? Hindus were forced to convert to chrisitianity or faced torture and death – thousands fled to flee Goa in order to keep their culture and religious beliefs.
this is what Vasco da Gama did, :
“When all the Indians had thus been executed, he ordered them to strike upon their teeth with staves and they knocked them down their throats; as they were put on board, heaped on top of each other, mixed up with the blood which streamed from them; and he ordered mats and dry leaves to be spread over them and sails to be set for the shore and the vessels set on fire… ” Before killing and burning the innocent Hindus he had their hands, ears and noses cut off.
More recently,
Bombing of abortion clinics and assasination of clinic employees?
http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_viol.htm
“Gay-bashing” inspired by Christian homophobia and intolerance?
http://www.independent.ie/opin.....86723.html
Genocide in Rwanda? – priests, nuns and even Bishops were indicted and a great many were convicted (by war crimes tribunals) for being directly responsible for the senseless slaughter of thousands of innocent Tutsis? Many clergy turned over those who had taken shelter in their churches to the machetes of the Hutu militia. The hatred and division between the Hutus and Tutsis was propagated by the missionaries as favorable for their objectives of conversion to Christianity.
“Some 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus were slaughtered in the 1994 genocide and thousands of people were killed after seeking sanctuary in churches.”
http://www.meta-religion.com/N.....da_nun.htm
Something must be wrong with Christianity. Terribly wrong.
There can be no comparison between Christianity/Judaism and Islam becuase Islam is not a religion. It’s a violent political ideology. That’s why apostasy is punishable by death. It’s treason against the state.
This should really be something like a DUH! ….for no other religion preaches death for apostasy. States do that though and they call it treason.
The Quran, unlike the Bible, makes it very clear that Muslims are to make war on non-Muslims until they submit. The Quran isn’t merely relating past events. It’s talking about the religious duty of all Muslims to continue this. This is spelled out explicitly.
Why are Muslims trying to get out of Islamic countries and into the Christian west?
Why are they willing to risk their lives to enter the dar al-harb?
They’re doing this because their own societies don’t work. Islam doesn’t work. It’s a bankrupt political system from another era. It needs to be smothered once and for all.
Miss,
You’ve been watching too much Fox News I’m afraid.
I take it you’re American?
The idea that Islam has no values in common with other cultures, is inferior to the West and is a violent political ideology rather than a religion is BIGOTRY at it’s purest.
“When the world is compelled to coin a new term to take account of increasingly widespread bigotry, that is a sad and troubling development. Such is the case with Islamophobia.”Kofi Annan, UN conference on Islamophobia in 2004.
I couldn’t care less what some UN bureaucrat says.
I went through a very dark period some years ago and converted to Islam. I am no longer a Muslim. (guess that was obvious) I don’t follow any religion now.
All you’ve been doing is parroting the “Islam is peace” line. I’ve pointed out a couple of times now that the Quran explicitly calls for Muslims to make war on non-Muslims. It’s pretty straightforward stuff. Not hard to understand.
Are you a Muslim?
“I went through a very dark period some years ago and converted to Islam. I am no longer a Muslim.”
So, your bigotry and Islamophobia marks the enlightened period in your life?
“All you’ve been doing is parroting the “Islam is peace” line.”
Those words never crossed my lips. Let’s argue on the things i’ve actually said. I said that the vast majority of Muslims are moderate people who conduct their lives like the rest of us i.e. peacefully and with respect to others.
“I’ve pointed out a couple of times now that the Quran explicitly calls for Muslims to make war on non-Muslims.”
And i’ve pointed out that the Christian and Judaic texts make similar explicit calls for violence against non-believers.
Christian, Hebraic and Islamic texts contain similar passages equating to:
‘the world is divided between believers and non-believers. Non-believers are sinners who either should be converted or killed’.
and i gave examples…
“Islam seeks to dominate these groups and to bring them into the “dar al islam.”
Both Christinaity and Islam share a thirst for quantitative and territorial expansion. Their potential dreamlands are ‘Christendom/kingdom’ and ‘Dar-ul-Islam’. Why do you identify only ‘Dar-ul-Islam’ but don’t acknowledge the Christian notions of a ‘Christian Kingdom’?
As for Muslims advocating conversion by force, i’ve given many examples of violent Christian conversion.
Even “peaceful” conversions as practiced by Christian Missionaries around the world is violence, there is no other accurate definition for it. Missionaries discuss the violent nature of their work in terms like extraction theology, meaning to tear people out of their culture, communities, i.e alienate them. So, even when conversion to Christianity happens in a physically non-violent way, it’s still violence.
“When the missionaries arrived, the Africans had the land and the missionaries had the Bible. They taught us to pray with our eyes closed. When we opened them, they had the land and we had the Bible.”
Jomo Kenyatta, Kenya’s first elected Prime Minister (1963-1964) and President (1964-1978)
“Are you a Muslim?”
No. I just don’t like hypocrisy and double standards.
And i’ve pointed out that the Christian and Judaic texts make similar explicit calls for violence against non-believers.
Christians and Jews don’t teach their children to kill unbelievers and you know it. Islam is producing the vast majority of the world’s terrorists.
Why do you identify only ‘Dar-ul-Islam’ but don’t acknowledge the Christian notions of a ‘Christian Kingdom’?
What Christian “kingdom” are you talking about?
As for Muslims advocating conversion by force, i’ve given many examples of violent Christian conversion.
The difference is that this is an explicit instruction actually found in the Quran.
9:29 “Fight those who believe not in God and the Last Day and do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden–such men as practice not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book–until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled.“
So, even when conversion to Christianity happens in a physically non-violent way, it’s still violence.
haha
haha
I think Jomo Kenyatta’s quote above is enough to indicate how the people of Kenya had their land and culture raped and violated by ‘non-violent’ Christian proselytisers. They prayed with their eyes closed and when they opened their land was gone…
You don’t have to be “physically hurt” to suffer violence.
Merriam Webster’s definition of Violence:
1 a: exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse (as in warfare effecting illegal entry into a house) b: an instance of violent treatment or procedure
2: injury by or as if by distortion, infringement, or profanation : outrage
3 a: intense, turbulent, or furious and often destructive action or force b: vehement feeling or expression : fervor ; also : an instance of such action or feeling c: a clashing or jarring quality : discordance
4: undue alteration (as of wording or sense in editing a text)
“When you physically hurt me, it is violence. If you hurt me emotionally, it is violence. And if you hurt me spiritually, that is the worst violence, rank violence. When you convert somebody, you have to criticize the person’s religion, his worship, his culture. All these hurt. When he converts, there is more hurt. He has to disown his parents, their wisdom and their culture, his ancestors and entire community. You isolate, uproot and emotionally unsettle him.”
(Swami Dayananda Saraswati, Hindu religious scholar).
Christians and Jews don’t teach their children to kill unbelievers and you know it.
Nor do the majority of Muslims. You’ll find a small minorty of religious nuts in every religion:
“We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren’t punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That’s war. And this is war.” Ann Coulter.
What Christian “kingdom” are you talking about?
The same one which has sought territorial and quantitative expansion throughout history.
The difference is that this is an explicit instruction actually found in the Quran.
9:29 “Fight those who believe not in God and the Last Day and do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden–such men as practice not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book–until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled.“
I don’t see anything in that passage which doesn’t also exist in Christian and Jewish texts:
In the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) God is recorded as punishing ancient Israelite individuals and members of other tribes for following the wrong religion, or deviating from “proper” religious practices. In some cases, the victims are viewed as having no right to continue living. In the book of Joshua and elsewhere, God instructed the ancient Israelites to commit what would be termed genocides and “mass crimes against humanity” in today’s world. The victims were newborn, infant, child, youth, and adult Canaanites and other nearby tribes who followed Pagan religions.
In the Christianity, particularly in the Gospel of John, the Jews are vilified and called the sons of Satan. Until recent decades, many Christian denominations held that Jews of the first century and their descendents down to the present day were held responsible for Jesus’s execution. This laid the groundwork for millennia of Christian persecution of Jews and set the stage for the Nazi Holocaust.
Religious exclusivity is present in all three religions but you only seem interested in highlighting it in Islam.
Religious exclusivity is present in all three religions but you only seem interested in highlighting it in Islam.
It’s about how Islam views the Quran. The Quran is to Islam what Jesus is to Christianity. It is the uncreated speech of God. You can never engage in any type of textual criticism of that.
Christians and Jews both view the Bible as a creation. That’s why you can walk into any decent sized bookstore and find many theological books dissecting the Biblical text, arguing for authorship etc. In Islam the Quran is uncreated and came to one man via dictation. Muhammed, in their view, had no part in writing it. He was supposedly illiterate.
So, it’s not correct to compare the Bible to the Quran. We should be comparing Jesus to the Quran.
I don’t see anything in that passage which doesn’t also exist in Christian and Jewish texts
See what I wrote above.
The Quran’s instructions are binding today. The Old Testament is a narrative of what happened in the past. That’s why you don’t see scores of Jews running around blowing people up all over the world.
In the Christianity, particularly in the Gospel of John, the Jews are vilified and called the sons of Satan.
Again, the New Testament doesn’t have an explicit command to kill Jews if they don’t convert to Christianity. It’s the explicitness that makes the Quran different. When something is that explicit coupled with the fact that Muslims view the Quran as the uncreated speech of God….we’ve got a problem.
Apostasy in Islam:
The four major Sunni Madh’hab (schools of Islamic jurisprudence) and the Twelver Shi’a Jafari madhab agree that a sane adult male apostate must be executed.
(Encyclopedia of Islam)
I wonder what the Pope has to say about people who leave Catholicism.
I wonder if the Lubavitchers slay apostates…or, even if they don’t, if it’s allowed.
What do you think?
The Wikipedia page is good in that it has some nice quotes from Maududi, someone every Muslim is familar with. Maududi points out that Islam is not a religion as we know it:
If Islam is truly a “religion” in the sense that religion is understood at present, surely it would be absurd to prescribe the penalty of execution for those people who wish to leave it because of their dissatisfaction with its principles. It is not only a “religion” in the modern technical sense of that term but a complete order of life.
That’s what I’ve been saying and I’ve been called an Islamophobe.
I’ve also been saying this:
Whatever objections the critics pose regarding the punishment of the apostate, they make them bearing in mind only a single “religion” (madhhab). In contrast, when we present our arguments to demonstrate the validity of this punishment, we have in view no mere “religion” but a state which is constructed on a religion(din) and the authority of its principles rather than on the authority of a family, clan or people.
So, you don’t need Fox news to tell you this. Just turn to the Muslims themselves.
More than anyone else Greeks should play a prominent role in eventually breaking the darkness of Islam and freeing its captives.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related
Miss,
Why did you highlight my sentence on ‘religious exclusivity’ and then proceed to write about a totally unrelated issue?
By religious exclusivity, I meant that most Christians and Muslims consider each other’s religion to hold invalid beliefs, or consider them wrong or deluded, or judge their behaviour to be immoral or heretical. And i gave you examples of this in the Hebrew and Christian texts to counter your quote from the Quran.
You cannot put forward a quote from the Quran, claim it is an example of the intolerance of Islam but then completely absolve and downplay a similar text from the Christian and Hebrew Holy Books.
Here are some ‘tolerant’ Christians making their views on religious exclusivity known.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZ9To30Hz7A
You say that it’s the “explicitness that makes the Quran different”. Well, Jesus calls for the murder of those who do not follow him in explicit terms too, Luke 19:27 says:
“But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.”
My point throughout this thread is that MOST Muslims conduct their lives much like MOST Christians i.e. peacefully and with respect to others. It is disingenuous to highlight specific texts in the Quran which contain violence or calls to violence and suggest that this represents Islam or mainstream Muslim culture.
Christian and Hebrew texts contain similarly explicit passages and there are extreme Christians who have killed and persecuted homosexuals, abortion clinic staff and women. Are we to assume that the minority of these extremists represent all Christians and Jews and these actions are manifestations of a barbaric religion? Of course not. So why should we suggest that the minority of extremist Muslims represent all Muslims and that their actions are manifestations of Islam? We can’t have it both ways.
And you choose to quote Maududi, the controversial Islamic philosopher, to somehow suggest that his radical views of Islamic revolution represent the role of Islam and the views of all Muslims. Again you are being is disingenuous. It’s like suggesting that the KKK represents Christianity.
(Some Islamic scholars complain that Maududi strove to solve the main principles of Islam using “his own reason,” departing from “Islamic knowledge”. The critics suggests that, “Islam should spread not through revolution but through knowledge, justice and morals.)
But it’s easier to quote religious radicals like Maududi or provocateurs like Ayaan Hirsi Ali to show Islam and Muslims in a negative light. (Ayaan Hirsi Ali works for a Christian-Evangelical [neo-conservative] think-tank in the United States.)
“Those Muslims who mistreat women are not representing the principles of the religion – in every religion you get black sheep”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csoucrvevL8
It is disingenuous to highlight specific texts in the Quran which contain violence or calls to violence and suggest that this represents Islam or mainstream Muslim culture.
It’s not disingenous at all to suggest that the Quran represents Islam.
You can pull out all the passages from the Bible that you believe show similar ideas in Christianity and Judaism but you can’t escape the fact that Islamic societies are brutal, undemocratic places and that Christians and Jews aren’t running around blowing people up in the name of their religion.
I think you are a Muslim. Who else would criticize Ayaan Hirsi Ali and call her a provocateur? Most atheists and other non-religious types rally around her because she’s one of the very few people who has had the courage to stand up and say something. Why should I care that the neo-cons like her? It only proves that on this issue they are 100% correct.
“Those Muslims who mistreat women are not representing the principles of the religion – in every religion you get black sheep”
The Quran explicitly says that it’s OK to beat your wife.
Btw, I’m neither a Christian nor a Jew. I don’t follow any religion.
So, I’m not here to argue Christianity/Judaism vs Islam. I am here to point out that Islam, unlike Christianity and Judaism, is producing some very rotten fruit and because of this we should think twice about how “terrible” it is to close an unlicensed mosque in Athens.
Yesterday I saw a documentary about Darryl Hunt who went to prison for almost twenty years for a crime he did not commit. One person in the film said something that struck me so hard that I had to write it here on this thread because I think it’s relevant.
[Insert prejudice of choice]
Just curious…
What does racism have to do with this discussion? Islam is not a race.
(I was going to write that people of all races choose to follow Islam and then I realized that this wasn’t correct. Many people are forced as there’s no freedom of conscience with Islam.)
As I said at the bottom
Why do you consider criticism of Islam to be prejudice?
Would you be just as worried about prejudice if I were criticising Nazism?
Islamophobia is prejudice.
Don’t worry Miss. She throws a hissy fit about race on every post. Large French fry of the shoulder I think.
What is “Islamophobia” exactly?
Don’t worry Miss. She throws a hissy fit about race on every post.
Terms like “Islamophobia” are nothing more than a way to stop people from pointing out the obvious because the truth hurts: Islam is a failed religious and political system that destroys both societies and individuals.
If pressed both of them would have to admit that Islamic societies are fundamentally unjust, undemocratic and that their citizens routinely attempt to escape from them. (Actually, DeviousDiva has admitted this indirectly in the many posts here about refugees.)
I think it’s funny to keep pointing out the horrors of Greek xenophobia when the real question should be…
Why are all these people willing to risk their lives to escape from Islamic countries and come to the west?
I think it’s time to shut the door, go over to where they’re coming from and ask….just what on earth is going on in your country? Why are so many of your citizens risking their lives to enter my country and overload my system? Do you mind if I have a look…because something appears to be wrong. Shall I help you fix it?
@phobiaphobe
Obviously you have hardly read my blog.And obviously you are very rude.
@Miss
Islamophobia is a fairly common word these days. I’m surprised you don’t know it ? The generally accepted definition is: an irrational fear or prejudice towards Islam and Muslims.
Totally untrue. Please let me know where you THINK I admit such a thing indirectly.
Ridiculous.
Miss,
I think it’s funny to keep pointing out the horrors of Greek xenophobia
I have never accused Greeks of being xenophobic – I think Southern European people in general, are the most welcoming, hospitable people I’ve ever come across (I live in Portugal for 6 months of the year). I can’t stand people who come on here and suggest that Greeks, Italians, Portuguese and Spaniards are somehow incapable of being concerned or sensitivite to human rights issues.
The people of the so-called P.I.G.S. countries (Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain) are constantly criticised by many ignorant Brits but i’m not one of them.
Why are all these people willing to risk their lives to escape from Islamic countries and come to the west?
There are four million refugees from Iraq alone – driven from their homes by our and the USA’s invasion and the death squads that followed in its wake. The countries who started these wars i.e. my country and the US should take in the refugees and not expect poor countries with limited infrastructure like Greece to cope with the huge influx of refugees.
According to the United Nations there are “8.4 million refugees and as many as 23.7 million uprooted civilians in their own countries” – Expecting poorer countries like Greece to cope with this level of migration is a crime against Greece (funds which can be used to improve state services and living conditions for Greeks are diverted for refugee humanitarian issues) and a crime against refugees because of dire living conditions in poorer countries. It’s an unnacceptable double whammy.
MY COUNTRY, the UK, should take in ALL the refugees of the wars we helped create – (we have the infrastructure, we have the space, anyone who has driven or taken train journeys past the vast rolling hills of the English countryside and empty villages can attest to the fact that we have the space).
It was my country (and USA) which destroyed refugees’ countries so we should should bear the brunt of the consequences of our actions.
But judging by the level of intolerance shown by mainstream British society towards Polish/Eastern European, Somalian immigrants) and the level of intolerance shown by mainstream American society towards Mexican immigrants, i’m not sure whether accepting responsibility for our actions is a viable option.
This year the US has accepted a paltry 7,000 refugees from Iraq – cherrypicking the educated and those with money. In 2006 Britain accepted only 950 Iraqi refugees. Over 90 percent of refugee applications are refused in my country.
If only we were as tolerant as the Southern European people, who not only take in thousands of refugees far above what they can cope with, from the wars WE caused, but are ALSO taking in hundreds of thousands of xenophobic British ex-pats who build segrated communties surrounded by iron gates, refuse to learn the local language, refuse to eat the local “foreign muck”, do not integrate with the local community and frequently make offensive generalisations and condescending remarks towards the countryfolk whose country we live in.
And we Brits constantly criticise immigrant workers “coming to our country, taking all our jobs” but we ignore the fact there are 2,000,000 of us working in Europe (more than twice the amount of foreign workers in UK). Hypocrisy at it’s finest.
In my experience, Southern Europe is the heart of hospitality and tolerance of the “foreigner” so i will never criticise Greece or other SE countries for being xenophobic.
And obviously you are very rude.
No, I’m not rude. You just don’t agree with me, that’s all. You want me to be “nice” and pretend that all cultures are equal when it’s clear that they aren’t.
I don’t have an irrational fear of Islam. I have a healthy fear of a religious/political ideology that can make people want to blow themselves up in order to kill.
Yes Michael…it’s ALL our fault. If we could just remove ourselves from the planet then all these decent people could get on with their lives.
but are ALSO taking in hundreds of thousands of xenophobic British ex-pats who build segrated communties surrounded by iron gates, refuse to learn the local language, refuse to eat the local “foreign muck”, do not integrate with the local community and frequently make offensive generalisations and condescending remarks towards the countryfolk whose country we live in.
I haven’t met any British ex-pats in Greece that fit that description.
Anyway, Greeks are one of the most culturally arrogant people on the face of the planet. That was the joke (probably lost on most non-Greeks) in My Big Fat Greek Wedding.
Please read more carefully, Miss. I wrote
I was not referring to you.
I haven’t met any British ex-pats in Greece that fit that description.
I was referring to the ex-pats in my neck of the woods in Portugal. Sorry i didn’t make that clear.
Yes Michael…it’s ALL our fault. If we could just remove ourselves from the planet then all these decent people could get on with their lives.
I don’t undertsand what you’re referring to.
Miss, the people who migrate to the West are not fleeing Islam, they are fleeing poverty and they don’t come to the West to find Christianity, but prosperity.
As about whether Islam has led them to poverty: that is far from clear. There are rich Muslim states and poor Christian states. In fact, historically it was the East that was rich and prosperous and the West that was barbaric and poor.
What’s more people don’t just leave Islamic countries to come to the West. People from all over the world move all over the world. Most of the world is poor and people try to go where the resouces are, from rural to urban communities and around every continent. That again has always happened- since prehistoric times. That is why there are people all over the world in the first place. In any case, our own very Christian Greek people were immigrating to the rich West until just a generation ago (hence the My Big Fat Greek Wedding premise).
Your argument about Islam being a violentreligion that advocates the extermination of infidels is historically short-sighted. The example of the Inquisition was brought up but you ignored it. If we don’t kill people in the West nowadays it’s despite our religion, and thanks to religious and political reforms that secularised our societies, very often forcefully (and not at all without bloodshed).
You make the argument that Islam is not a religion- but then you attribute the positive achievements of western societies to Christianity and its tolerance of other religions; so is Christianity a religion or also a political system too? And which were the other religions historically tolerated by Christianity in western countries? Judaism? Paganism? Not Islam, certainly!
In any case, I posit that in that sense Islam is a much more tolerant religion than Christianity- you will not find anything in the Bible about tolerating or even respecting the worship of others- as you do in the Quran about the “people of the book”.
Finally- if the Tourkokratia was a non-stop ethnical cleansing like you make it sound, there wouldn’t have been any Christians left to fight the Epanastasi in 21. Yet, at the time most of the Greek population was Christian and freely practiced their religion. The Ottomans employed Greek Christians and did business with them. For 400 years.
people who migrate to the West are not fleeing Islam, they are fleeing poverty and they don’t come to the West to find Christianity, but prosperity.
They actually are fleeing Islam though. Islam is more than just a religion. It’s also a political system and it has failed to provide them with prosperous, democratic societies.
I realize that they aren’t coming to the west to find Christianity. They are coming because the west is secularized now and the Islamic world isn’t. It never will be because the Quran forbids it.
Islam is a religious and a political system. Anyone who says that it isn’t knows very, very little about Islam. The only way to get Islam out of politics is to get rid of Islam.
The example of the Inquisition was brought up but you ignored it. If we don’t kill people in the West nowadays it’s despite our religion, and thanks to religious and political reforms that secularised our societies, very often forcefully (and not at all without bloodshed).
There are violent passages in the Old Testament…but if you read it carefully it’s not a call to perpetual war and Jesus’s message was very different from Muhammed’s.
The Quran does preach…quite explicitly….that non-Muslims are to be killed if they don’t submit to Islam. I’m not sure why this isn’t being acknowledged. Muslims today don’t believe that those are stories from the past. They believe that this sort of thing applies today. They openly admit that.
The west was able to be secularized because Christianity has, at its core, the message that church and state are separate. Islam doesn’t. Societies under Islam will never be able to have what we have. They will be perpetually in the dark ages. If they didn’t make war on other societies they would all wither and die.
You make the argument that Islam is not a religion- but then you attribute the positive achievements of western societies to Christianity and its tolerance of other religions; so is Christianity a religion or also a political system too?
I didn’t say that. We don’t have any Christian theocratic states in the West. The idea is actually anti-New Testament.
The west has been secularized and religion is, for the most part, an individual choice. We are not forced to conform religiously. This isn’t the case with Islamic societies…because there is no separation of mosque and state in Islam. If there is..it won’t be Islam.
So, Islam is indeed more than a religion. It’s a political system as well. That’s what makes it dangerous. Unfortunately, this is a very subtle point and one that’s difficult for many people to grasp.
if the Tourkokratia was a non-stop ethnical cleansing like you make it sound, there wouldn’t have been any Christians left to fight the Epanastasi in 21.
I never said that it was. However, Greeks were second class people. Christians were never equal to the Muslims.
What is the overall message of the Quran?
Step back, take an honest look at it and think….what is the overall message being preached?
There is no separation of church and state in Greece either.
It’s not the same thing. It’s a necessary part of Islam.
What we have here in Greece is NOT based on anything that can be found in the New Testament.
Also, the Church, while powerful and corrupt, could hardly be accused of abusing human rights. There is no death for apostasy.
The people in the UK are not especially prosperous neither is their society particulary democratic: the UK has one of the highest infant poverty rates and one of the worse human rights records in Europe. Yet it is predominantly Christian. So are other countries with even higher levels of poverty and worse human rights violations around the world. China on the other hand is neither Christian or Islamic, yet it is both poor and violates human rights routinely. You are failing to make a convincing connection between Islam, poverty and undemocratic societies. I suggest you remove Islam from the equation.
It should be obvious that immigrants from Islamic countries are not “fleeing Islam”: their vast majority does not convert to Christianity when they move to the West, neither do they stop practicing their faith, as demonstrated by this very blog post we are commenting on. In fact that is, allegedly “the problem”. That muslims themselves seem to quite like their religion and do not feel particulary oppressed by it, at least not to the point that they want to change it (and that includes women, obviously).
I can not take seriously your argument that western societies were secularised because Christianity “has at its core the message that church and state are separate”, not as a citizen of the modern Greeck state, not as a Greek who was taught the history of the Byzantine empire at school, nor as a medieval history enthusiast. It takes an extremely disingenuous reading of history to claim what you do. And a quite inaccurate one at that.
That “non Muslims should be killed if they don’t submit to Islam” is countered directly by the fact that no Islamic state executes foreigners who visit it unless they convert to Islam, neither does any Islamic state actually wage war in order to convert or extreminate neighbours. You can make a case for Iran, but you should be careful: a stronger case can be made against non-muslim Israel.
As about the second-class status of Christians in the Ottoman Empire; the people who lived in the lands conquered by the Ottomans were second-class citizens of the Emipre, if you wish to see it like that, regardless of their religion. The same holds true for the people conquered by most Empires, from Alexander’s to the (Christian) Brittish Empire. So were the serfs and other non-nobles in Christain, feudal Europe in the middle ages. Religion is neither the only, nor the predominant determinant of social status, in human societies. But again I point you to the example of the Jews, living in “secular” Christian states, even to this date.
You are failing to make a convincing connection between Islam, poverty and undemocratic societies.
I’m failing to make a connection because you point out that the UK and China have problems?
You should instead point me to all the free and democratic Islamic societies. That would be a much better argument.
No. I pointed out countries that are non-Islamic, poor, undemocratic and whose citizens immigrate to the west. Their existence clearly demonstrates that poverty, undemocratic regimes and immigration are not the exclusive premise of Islam. Therefore your claim that Islam is the cause of poverty, undemocratic regimes and immigration is false.
Besides, you are missing the point. I am not trying to prove that Islam is democratic. I am demonstrating that your views are misinformed and prejudiced. And prfoundly unreasonable.
Oh for the love of god…! Google algebra, or zero. Or Al-Andalus. Or Algorithm. Or Alchemy. Or anything with “al” in it, really.
Their existence clearly demonstrates that poverty, undemocratic regimes and immigration are not the exclusive premise of Islam. Therefore your claim that Islam is the cause of poverty, undemocratic regimes and immigration is false.
The above doesn’t even make sense.
Google algebra, or zero. Or Al-Andalus. Or Algorithm. Or Alchemy. Or anything with “al” in it, really.
Yeah…and what was this “Islamic” scholarship based upon?
Just out of curiousity…
What do you win from supporting an ideology that’s so completely intolerant, inhuman and undemocratic…an ideology that would certainly put an end to everything you’re probably for (gay rights, women’s rights etc.)
Your support is illogical in the extreme.
Nobody has commented on death for apostasy in Islam.
Do you think it should be allowed in a European state? (Sharia law is already being allowed in some cases in the UK)
If not, why not? After all, it’s part of the religion and we want to respect that, no?
If we don’t allow it in the EU will we be guilty of Islamophobia?
Why is it of any relevance what Islamic peoples’ scientific advances were based on? You say Islamic countries “will always be in the dark ages”. Well, in the actual dark ages, they were doing fine and they were already Islamic.
It’s funny hearing you using the word “illogical”, when you have trouble following a simple logical formulation. In any case, I told you I’m not “supporting” Islam. It’s your views though that are “intolerant, inhuman and undemocratic”. I have every reason to oppose them. In my experience, biggoted people don’t just hate one kind of “other”- but all.
Sharia Law? That’s a red herring. Nobody advocates changing our laws to “accommodate” muslims. Because we don’t have to: the Constitution clearly states that people who live in Greece shall be free to practice their religion unobstructed:
It is exactly by denying muslims a place to worship, that Greek law is trodden underfoot, not the other way around like you try to present it.
You absolutely are supporting Islam.
You are supporting the world’s most intolerant and inhuman ideology in an attempt to be tolerant.
That’s not tolerance, that’s stupidity.
So Muslims should be free to practice their religion in Greece. Does that include death for apostasy? If not, why not?
If Muslims aren’t free to put to death apostates can it really be said that they’re practicing their religion unobstructed?
You are being childish. Putting people to death has nothing to do with muslim worship, except in your distrubed mind. There’s a mosque next to where I live and I’ve never seen any public executions of “apostates”.
In any case, there doesn’t seem to be any issue as far as the Constitution is concerned:
So is the straw man dead yet?
Putting people to death has nothing to do with muslim worship, except in your distrubed mind
“The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Messenger, cannot be shed except in three cases: in Qisas (equality in punishment) for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (Apostate) and leaves the Muslims.”
(Bukhari 9, 17)
This is one of many. So, there are no straw men here.
Of course, I absolutely believe that you understand this. You know that this stuff exists and you know that it’s considered authoritative. However, it doesn’t fit in with your “tolerant” worldview and therefore you call me “disturbed” for pointing it out.
Miss,
You are distorting and misinforming again,
“The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Messenger, cannot be shed except in three cases: in Qisas (equality in punishment) for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (Apostate) and leaves the Muslims.”
^This is a passage from one of the many hadith texts, not the Quran. There is no mention of a ‘death penalty’ for apostates in the Quran. (It’s not even clear whether the hadith you quote is a death penalty for treason rather than apostasy).
Most Muslims do not consider the words of the hadiths to be the word of God – and you do not have to accept the guidance in the hadiths to be considered a devout Muslim.
While there are many traditional Muslims who rely on the hadiths to determine how a muslim should live their lives, most Muslims are free to trust their individual conscience, and use their own judgment when reading the hadiths.
Muslims are not required to follow the hadiths to be considered Muslim.
Most Muslims exercise their conscience and common sense when reading religious texts especially the hadiths, much like most Christians exercise theirs when reading texts like this:
“…do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them…as the Lord your God has commanded you…” Deuteronomy 20:16, NIV.
Miss (an appropriate nickname):
You are completely missing the point, aren’t you?
It makes no difference whether Islam is the way you are trying to present it or not. The right to worship one’s chosen religion in Greece is not conditional. It is stated in absolutely unambiguous terms, with no ifs and buts and maybes. There are no clauses about “good people can worship freely, bad people can’t”. Every known religion is free to be practiced. Every.
Therefore, your assertions that muslims are evil and scary and they’re here to rape us and take away our freedoms and they should be second-class citizens because Greeks were too in the Ottoman Empire, they are all completely irrelevant. In any case, at the moment you’re the one I see advocating the taking of freedoms away from people. And if it’s religious intolerance you’re so concerned about- then how come you’re the one who thinks we shouldn’t allow people to practice their religion freely?
Incidentally, that piece of text misquoted as Quranic, it’s a bit confusing isn’t it? It says that there are three cases in which a muslim would be lawfully killed- yet one is that they are no longer a muslim? So why do you need rules to kill them as a muslim then?
See, this is why it doesn’t pay to use scripture to make a point: they’re always badly written and open to all sorts of (Miss-)interpretation.
you do not have to accept the guidance in the hadiths to be considered a devout Muslim.
Try talking this “Quran only” stuff around a bunch of mainstream Muslims. The Ahadith are authoritative for the vast majority of the world’s Muslims. The vast majority. The Quran only movement is a fringe movement.
I spent years talking with the Quran only Muslims. Most of them eventually left Islam because they couldn’t make the system work without the ahadith. They certainly tried though.
I didn’t say that it was from the Quran. I knew very well that it was a hadith. As I said, I used to be a Muslim.
It says that there are three cases in which a muslim would be lawfully killed- yet one is that they are no longer a muslim? So why do you need rules to kill them as a muslim then?
What?
Islam considers everyone who takes shahadah to continue to be a Muslim…even if that person apostasizes. Muslims consider me to be an apostate Muslim rather than a non-Muslim.
You do not have to follow the hadiths to be considered a devout Muslim. In fact, unlike the Quran, you don’t even have to wash your body before reading the hadiths, that’s how they rank in Islam. They were written by religious scholars, mostly in the 9th century and they are not considered to be the word of God – the hadiths are very much “take it or leave it” for Muslims, they are more for guidance rather than religious doctrine. Each branch of Islam (Sunni, Shi’a..) have their own hadiths and often conflict with each other they so they are BY NO MEANS UNIVERSALLY ACCEPTED by Muslims.
The Quran is THE most important text for ALL Muslims and there is NO MENTION of a ‘death penalty’ for apostasy in the Quran.
the hadiths are very much “take it or leave it” for Muslims,
Who told you that? It’s not true at all.
Muslims are free to exercise their conscience when reading the hadiths.
Not so with the Quran. It is THE most important text in Islam, to be followed to the letter.
Please tell me where the Quran calls for death of apostates.
Watch from 1:16:30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XulKyLhS694
Muslims are free to exercise their conscience when reading the hadiths.
That is not true at all. Even moderate, mainstream Muslims will tell you that the ahadith are a necessary part of Islam.
Please tell me where the Quran calls for death of apostates.
http://www.answering-islam.org.....c157226270
I understand that some Muslims want to reject the ahadith. However, they’re a small, persecuted fringe movement. Most Muslims do not believe this.
From your own source:
“the Quran does not come out and state explicitly that apostates should be killed.”
I’m not going to get into a Quran-only debate with you. However, I will say that the Quran-only movement is very fringe and not accepted by mainstream Muslims. Its followers are routinely persecuted and you don’t want to walk into a non-Quran-only mosque and announce that you hold this view.
The Quran absolutely does say to fight non-believers until they submit. Do you agree with this?
Miss, did you actually hear the religious scholar in the Youtube video i provided?
He says that if a Muslim reads things in the hadiths which they are not happy with, or seem bad or negative, they can discard them because they are written by man and not the word of God. You are not required to follow every word of the hadiths to be considered a devout Muslim.
Sure, you can discard whatever you want, in theory. However, try walking into any mainstream mosque and announcing that you are Quran-only.
Mainstream Islam does not take kindly to this movement. They do not represent Islam. They represent an ‘Islam’ which has never been.
However, try walking into any mainstream mosque and announcing that you are Quran-only
You don’t have to say that you’re Quran-only. As a Muslim you are free to accept those hadiths which you are personally happy with following. You can disregard the texts which you personally believe are not pious or against your conscience. You will not be considered any less of a Muslim for doing this because the hadiths are written by men and not considered the word of God.
This argument is going around in circles because you refuse to understand some fundamental concepts in Islam.
I think it’s fortunate that you left a religion that you don’t really understand.
You will not be considered any less of a Muslim
ROFL
Try telling that to mainstream Muslims who are religious enough to attend a mosque on a regular basis. It won’t go over very well.
If you are Quran-only then you know that I’m right so stop pretending.
Try addressing the points i’m actually making rather than highlighting sentences and going off at irrelevant tangents.
Have you ever worshipped in a mosque?
I am addressing the issue. Quran-only is a small, persecuted FRINGE movement in Islam.
I have worshipped in a mosque and believe me, you wouldn’t have wanted to go around preaching Quran-only there.
Quran-only is a small, persecuted FRINGE movement in Islam.
Disregarding some texts of the hadiths doesn’t necessarily make you a ‘Quran-only’ Muslim. You may disregard some hadtihs which you do not consider pious but believe in other hadiths which you do consider pious. How can you be a ‘Quran-only’ Muslim when you believe in some hadiths?
Do you refute the concept of Muslims being able to decide which hadiths they accept as pious?
Are you a Muslim, Michael?
Are you a Muslim, Michael?
I’ve answered your question before. I’m not Muslim.
I was born and brought up in an area of London which has a large Muslim community, my best friends at school were Muslims, many of my closest friends now are Muslims, i lived amongst Muslims, experienced their festivals and religious celebrations, i lived in their homes as they did in mine, i ate their food as they did mine. Their hospitality and acceptance of me as a Christian was more forthcoming than my fellow Christian “indigenous Brits” (the UK is supposedly a “Christian country” but most Brits haven’t set foot in a church accept for the odd christening, we only bring up being a “Chrisitian Country” when we want to draw attention to the problem of “too many Muslims wanting to take over our ‘Christian country’”).
Most Muslims are just like the rest of us, they share exactly the same problems as us – we are all in the same boat – that’s why i can’t stand people demonising a group of people on the basis of misinformation and scaremongering.
lol
That’s my experience of Christianity in England too!
I know Muslims can be very welcoming. However, Islam isn’t as you portray it. We’re talking about the religion here…not the people.