DOES ISLAM PROMOTE TERRORISM?

Absolutely Not. Islam condemns all acts of oppression. Necessary force is permissible only when one is defending oneself, family, and right to practice his/her religion or fighting tyranny and oppression. Muslims who blow up buildings and kill innocent people are not acting in accordance with what Islam teaches.


im reading a lot on this board that people think Islam is a violent religion. This is the furthest from the truth. so i thought i'd help clarify a few things..

when people bash islam, saying our book is promoting hate and violence, they take their verses totally out of context. for example, islamaphobes always use 2:191 - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah is worse than killing."

if people would have paid attention the verse before that, 2:190 - And fight in the Way of Allâh those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allâh likes not the transgressors.

The Quran was revealed over a long stretch of time. when problems arose, God sent a resolution. At the time of these specific verses, muslims were being tortured and persecuted. the muslims never stuck back, they always turned the other cheek, because islam is PEACE. then, God instructed to defend themselves. by islamic law, we are not allowed to fight, unless attacked first.

also on a note, these are the rules, but it doesnt mean everyone follows them. just because a radical person claims he's a follower of islam, shouldnt reflect islam itself. thats like saying that all chrstians are white supremacists because of the KKK, thats BS right? same thing applies for islam. real followers of islam have nothing to do with these people, they give us all a bad reputation, and they mislead people and shine a negative light on islam.


The Correct Islaamic Position on Terrorism

"Killing and terrorizing innocent people and the destruction of property are not condoned by Islam. Attributing all these horrific incidents to Islam is unjust. Muslims should tell the truth and unveil falseness, and inform all people that Islam is a religion of righteousness, betterment and progress. Islam is the final revelation that Allah chose for humankind to guide it from darkness to light. Allah said: “This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.”

Our religion urges us to fulfill our obligations and prohibits us from abandoning such obligations. Allah said: “O you who believe! Fulfill your obligations.” The unjust killing of a human being in Islam is forbidden. Allah said: “And kill not anyone whom Allah has forbidden except for a just cause.”

Corruption on earth is considered a major sin in Islam. Allah said: “And of mankind there is he whose speech may please you in this worldly life, and he calls Allah to witness as to that which is in his heart, yet he is the most quarrelsome of the opponents. And when he turns away from you, his effort in the land is to make mischief therein and to destroy the crops and the cattle, and Allah likes not mischief. And when it is said to him ‘Fear Allah,’ he is led by arrogance to more crime. So enough for him is Hell, and worst indeed is that place to rest.”
- Shaikh Abdulaziz Bin Abdullah Al-AsShaikh, the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia"

Also, a major Sheikh of Islam, the respected Ibn Uthaymeen, heres a link to his rulings regarding terrorism, suicide, and the like. http://www.spubs.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=MNJ14&articleI...40007&articlePages=1


heres a video of a muslim speaking and answering questions about islam if anyone is truely interesting the the truth about our religion. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8888235112692728009

hey i have read many of the points on this topic and would like to give people the following link

http://indianmuslims.in/islam-muslims-and-terrorism/

this clearly discusses the topic

ok,
I'm a Muslim... and I've red alot about Islam "it's my religion" so, Islam never ever promote terror. and if any one wants to be sure about it you can read about Prophet Mohammed PBUH when he used to send his troops to war he used to tell them "Don't kill a woman, a kid, An old man and don't even cut a tree" and in Islam it's not allowed to any one to ignore the leader and if someone do he's oyt of the religion so... these ppl who are covering under the name of Islam to achieve their goals are already not Muslims and they're doing nothing but stealing lives... like any other murderer in the world.
Islam problem that none is following it right including myself, I'm not religious at all, but i know what's Islam. Prophet Mohamed said "i as sent to complete the right attitude" that includes respect human lives and saving it.
plz all don't judge a religion or a race regarding to a few.

quote:

I have many frdns who follow islam.Its completely unture tht it promotes terrorism.

Not all Islamic groups promote terrorism however there are many that do. The groups that do promote terrorism will defend their actions and say that they are doing the will of God. So it is true that some versions of Islam promote terrorism.

quote:

Alright, whatever. It sounds more like a universal want to me.

It is more than a universal want because we apply it not only to ourselves, but also to others basically we value our life and the life others. It is this valuing of the life of others that leads to a universal moral. For example we can condemn the actions of the VT shooter because he was killing innocent people. The universal moral would say that what he did was wrong.

quote:

That's very true. God used people without telling them he used them, especially against Israel. It's simply one possible way to see it as right.

Even if God uses people without telling them you can’t say that what ever you do is the will of God. You could only claim that you were doing the will of their God if their God had commanded you to kill them. Saying that you are doing the will of God would never stand in court if you had broken a law and it also does not justify killing millions of people. Anyone can claim that they are doing the will of God. The question is are they really?

quote:

Yep. Sucks, doesn't it? Thank goodess for some laws, right?

Yes that is why we have laws. So we can’t justify the killing of millions of Jews by saying that the strong was employing its personal freedom over the weaker. Of course that was what they were doing but that does not justify their actions.

quote:

Well, genocide is generally frowned upon.

Genocide is more then just frowned upon. The international community will go to war over genocide. The world has taken a very strong position against genocide. My point was that slimming the population is not an accepted reason for killing millions of people.

quote:

Not with that thought in mind, but it sure would get the point across.

So it would be okay if I had a different motivation? It would defiantly get the point across, but what if some people saw how much damage I had done and wanted to duplicate my actions?

quote:

but what if the personal truth doesn't conflict the larger one?

If the personal truth does not contradict with the larger one then there is no problem. The problem would only arise when there are many different interpretations of truth that don’t agree with each other. You can’t deviate very far from the main truth without having the truths conflict.

quote:

Because humans are idiots.

But if the religions are really part of God then they must be true, and the claims should be supported by God and not just made up by people. Because of this the religions should not contradict each other. If they are contradicting each other they can’t all be true.

I have many frdns who follow islam.Its completely unture tht it promotes terrorism.As everything has exceptions so does this...some of its followers have adopted "jehad" and have promoted the wrong meaning.It basically means to have peace n with the way things r taking shape thts neva gonna happen 4 sure.Its childish to expect tht the community will be treated normally like nothing ever happened.So the true muslims should stand up n speak out against the unjust staements being made ungaist them.

quote:

So we have an Universal moral.

Alright, whatever. It sounds more like a universal want to me.

quote:

But by that logic what ever you do to them is the will of their God

That's very true. God used people without telling them he used them, especially against Israel. It's simply one possible way to see it as right.

quote:

Basically if everyone does what is right in their own eyes we have chaos, and we really have no right to condemn people.

Yep. Sucks, doesn't it? Thank goodess for some laws, right?

quote:

If any type of slimming the population is good, then why shouldn’t people just go out and start gunning people down?

Well, genocide is generally frowned upon.

quote:

Should I perform an act of nuclear terrorism to show latter generations that nuclear terrorism is wrong?

Not with that thought in mind, but it sure would get the point across.

quote:

So if it is true that the sun is the center of the universe, the earth can’t be the center of the universe.

Well, of course you're right, but what if the personal truth doesn't conflict the larger one? It's just the shade supposing.

quote:

If all religions are all part of God then why do the religions’ contradict each others claims?

Because humans are idiots.

quote:

Because we all want to be safe.

Yes. So what I am saying is that we have an universal morale. We are valuing Human life and saying that it is important to protect Human life. So we have an Universal moral.

quote:

What if I said yes to both those questions?

So what happened? If you don’t feel comfortable with this question then please don’t feel pressured to answer it. In any case I am sorry for you.

quote:

It is right because it is caused by God.

But by that logic what ever you do to them is the will of their God. Basically you are claiming that if you kill them their God must want them killed. This really does not make any since. You could only claim that you are doing what their God wants if you had received a message from their God. You even said that the punishment was caused by their God, however if you are doing the action you need to have a direction of God to say that he was using you.

quote:

was just them employing their personal freedoms (inflicted, of course, upon those weaker). Ah, there's another one. They're stronger, and the strong survive

This exactly what I was saying. If there is no higher moral system then the strong will just employ their personal freedoms over the personal freedoms of others. In this case that lack of morals lead to the German military murdering millions of Jews. This is not right because it violates our value of protecting innocent Human life. Basically if everyone does what is right in their own eyes we have chaos, and we really have no right to condemn people.

quote:

Or one might say that it was good in the end because it helped slim the population.

If any type of slimming the population is good, then why shouldn’t people just go out and start gunning people down? We would condemn murder as wrong but according to what you just said it should be encouraged to lower the population of the earth. In this case we should allow the actions of people like the VT shooter and be thankful to him for the sacrifice he made to lower the population. This is insane clearly this type of action can not be accepted.

quote:

Their actions were good after the fact because it taught (one would hope) us about the dangers of dictatorship and hate.

Now you are getting into positive side effects of a bad action. This is an ends justifies the means approach. It is okay to be evil because it shows other people why they should not do the same thing. Should I perform an act of nuclear terrorism to show latter generations that nuclear terrorism is wrong?

Where we are now we can’t condemn any behavior as wrong. Because we are saying that there really is not any right or wrong. However we still instinctively identify certain things as wrong which is one of the reasons that I am saying that there really is some type of Universal definition for what things are wrong.

quote:

Aboslute truth? Yeah, I think there is one. But I also think there are a multitude of interpretations that are just as much truth as the "ultimate" one. It's related in my mind as is there one god? Well yes, there is the Source, but these gods, these pantheons, religons, are all facets of God, not any less truth, but just a portion of it. Sense?

This does not make sense because it is illogical. Something can’t be true and not true. This is the law of non-contradiction. So if it is true that the sun is the center of the universe, the earth can’t be the center of the universe.

If all religions are all part of God then why do the religions’ contradict each others claims?

Islam: there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is prophet.
Christianity: Jesus is the only way into the Kingdom of God
Pantheism: there are many Gods.
Buddhism: we must strive to be like the great Buddha, and those will be God like.

The claims of all these religions can’t be true because they contradict each other. Muhammad and Christ can’t both be the only way to God, but yet they both make that claim. And if there is no God but Allah, there can’t be many Gods. So by the definition of truth they can’t all be true. And once again the law of non-contradiction comes back into play.

quote:

However why are we choosing these justifications?

That's a dumb question. Because we all want to be safe.

quote:

Were you forced to convert? Or abused by a religious group?

What if I said yes to both those questions? But to clear something up, no one can make you believe something, they can make you spend every waking moment spending time on it.

quote:

Can you say murdering millions of defenseless people in prison camps is acceptable?

Sure. I said I could justify it, didn't I? "My defense." I don't have one. But here's somethinkg someone could employ. Let's take a religous standpoint. God has deemed the Jews his people, and as such, he's constantly punishing and saving them. This is just another punishment. It is right because it is caused by God. Their leader (and surely some of them) truly believed they were superior, and this genocide seen disgraceful by the rest of the world was just them employing their personal freedoms (inflicted, of course, upon those weaker). Ah, there's another one. They're stronger, and the strong survive. Or one might say that it was good in the end because it helped slim the population. Their actions were good after the fact because it taught (one would hope) us about the dangers of dictatorship and hate. Those are pretty basic and one dimentional. Now if you want to believe that any of those are my personal opinions, go ahead. I can also argue for the other side.

Aboslute truth? Yeah, I think there is one. But I also think there are a multitude of interpretations that are just as much truth as the "ultimate" one. It's related in my mind as is there one god? Well yes, there is the Source, but these gods, these pantheons, religons, are all facets of God, not any less truth, but just a portion of it. Sense?

quote:

Of course not. It has nothing to do with right and wrong.

Okay so you are saying that order has nothing to do with right and wrong. I was asking because clpo13 was saying that if an action broke down the order of a society it was discourage so order played a role in determining if a type of behavior was wrong.

quote:

I've already stated the justification: either it creates chaos or it's dangerous.

Okay so the Justification is stopping activities that create chaos or are dangerous. However why are we choosing these justifications? Why are we saying that chaos and danger are bad? Is it because these things are harmful to people? If so we are instating a value for Human life and saying that we have to protect the life of people from others irresponsible behavior. So now we have a universal moral, it is good to protect people from the irresponsibility of others. Chaos and danger are not inherently bad so they can only be wrong if they are violating some value that we are upholding.

quote:

Tell that to my ruined childhood.

Were you forced to convert? Or abused by a religious group?

quote:

I happen to like Germany.

I also like Germany.
I was not trying to come down on Germany or its people; all I was doing was using the situation that these German Commanders were in to pose a question.

quote:

I could defend either side, killing the Jews or saving them.

So they could have gone either way? There is nothing to say that killing the Jews would have always been wrong? Can you say murdering millions of defenseless people in prison camps is acceptable? On that note what is your defense for killing the Jews?

quote:

Could any of us answer that?

What is your answer to the question? I happen to think that there is absolute truth.

quote:

So is order the determining factor for what is right and wrong?

Of course not. It has nothing to do with right and wrong.

quote:

So if we are going to enforce a certain type of behavior we need a justification for doing so.

I've already stated the justification: either it creates chaos or it's dangerous.

quote:

Well forced conversions aren’t used by Christianity and are not used by the majority of Islamic groups.

Tell that to my ruined childhood.

quote:

Okay lest say it was what the leadership deemed to be right

That's all I wanted. I happen to like Germany.

quote:

So if there are no higher morals, which morals should, they have gone by?

Yes, morals come and go. How should I know what ones they should follow? I could defend either side, killing the Jews or saving them. Would you like me to?

quote:

One important question would be is there absolute truth?

Could any of us answer that?

quote:

Order and law should be interchangeable.

So is order the determining factor for what is right and wrong? Remember that these questions are being put forth under the basses that there is no universals and that morals are just individual’s feelings. So if we are going to enforce a certain type of behavior we need a justification for doing so. So far the stated justification has been order. But if order is all that there is then why do we uphold individualism? Do we uphold order as long as it is beneficial to us? If so then order is not the only determining factor for right and wrong and there must be something else, such as freedom.

quote:

You're wrong.

The CIA world fact book says that 33.03% of the world is Christian and 20.12% of the world is Muslim. So over half the world is either Christian or Muslim. If we want a larger majority we could change it to all religions and them forcing everyone to believe in some type of god.

quote:

Most of them already do that. And if they succeeded, we'd have a theocracy.

Well forced conversions aren’t used by Christianity and are not used by the majority of Islamic groups. However as you pointed out if it did happen we would have a theocracy. Would that be wrong? If so why? It may seem wrong to you, and me, but if morals are determined by individuals and the majority gets to determine which morals are used then a world theocracy could not really be wrong. Also is order is our standard we would have to accept this. A unity of though is more orderly then different thoughts.
However at the same time a theocracy would go against our determining factor of freedom. So on one basses a theocracy would be justified but by another it would be rejected. Does the majority get to pick which determining factor it goes by? Or does it have to find a balance between the morals that we have determined to uphold?

quote:

and individuals have their own opinions and ideas.

So we act as individuals, but again individuals are going to look out for their interests over the interests of others. If I always do what I feel is best then I will probable trample on someone else’s freedom. The same goes for threat other person. If he does what is best for him he will dispose of me because I am in his way. So don’t we have to have some overriding force to hold us in check? This is why rules are enforced and boundaries set for our behavior. The question is what is the basses for these rules and boundaries?

quote:

Can we admit it was not the country but the country's leader?

Okay lest say it was what the leadership deemed to be right. The point is that these German officers were doing what they had been told was right, so if right and wrong is individually based what basis did we have to punish them for their actions.

quote:

They are created by the society and circumstance.

So in that case they can come and go. Like in the case of world war two. The German commanders would have been breaking their countries morals if they did not kill the Jews, but by killing the Jews they were breaking the morals of other countries like America and Brittan. So if there are no higher morals, which morals should, they have gone by?

quote:

Yeah. No one wants to be prisoners, sexually abused or killed. So we see them as wrong and generally dissuade them.

So we see things as wrong simply because we don’t want them to happen to us? This is true but is more then this because we have the same reaction if these things happen to someone. Even if we aren’t involved we condemn certain behavior as wrong. So there is something innate in people that tells them that certain things are wrong, because even if we haven’t contemplated the thing happening to us, or haven’t experienced it personally we still see it a wrong, and have that negative reaction to it.

One important question would be is there absolute truth?

quote:

In that case I would state again what basses do we have for condemning people, or having a legal system? Is it all under order and if it is what would be wrong with a totalitarian state that strictly enforces order? Personal liberty and freedom aren’t necessary for order.

Dear Nephy, laws keep order. Order and law should be interchangeable. Unlawfulness and chaos. Good does not mean law. Personal liberty is in the law, because everyone likes it. What moron would write a law in which he didn't have any personal freedom or liberty? When people don't like something, they riot. Riot=chaos. Which law inspires the least amount of chaos? Allowing children to be raped or dissalowing it? I vote for the latter.

quote:

Now the majority of the people in the world are Christian or Muslim.

You're wrong.

quote:

What if those two religions teamed up and said that everyone else had to be part of their religion, and forced people to convert?

Most of them already do that. And if they succeeded, we'd have a theocracy.

quote:

What basses do we act on, or judge on?

We act on the basis that we're individuals (note basis not basses) and individuals have their own opinions and ideas.

quote:

However they were doing what their country deemed alright.

Can we admit it was not the country but the country's leader? Bush is doing a lot of things I don't agree with right now. Me and much of the country. It is the act of the person in power, not the people. Leader's act, not country's.

quote:

If the morals aren’t universal what are they?

They are created by the society and circumstance.

quote:

So what causes all these people to come to the same conclusion? Is there something that makes people see certain types of behavior as wrong?

Yeah. No one wants to be prisoners, sexually abused or killed. So we see them as wrong and generally dissuade them.

quote:

And I'm saying right and wrong don't exist at all. They are just labels, human-created ideas.

Alright I see what you are saying. One of the problems was what I was thinking of when you say right or wrong.

quote:

It's all about opinions.

So basically by your definition right and wrong just mean what a person thinks or feels. So wouldn’t that mean that rapping children, torture, sex slavery, murder and everything else is not really wrong. You would say that these actions are condemned but not really wrong. In that case I would state again what basses do we have for condemning people, or having a legal system? Is it all under order and if it is what would be wrong with a totalitarian state that strictly enforces order? Personal liberty and freedom aren’t necessary for order.

Consider this situation. According to you there is no right and wrong, only opinions and the majority get their way. Now the majority of the people in the world are Christian or Muslim. What if those two religions teamed up and said that everyone else had to be part of their religion, and forced people to convert? They would be the majority so according to you they should get to define right and wrong, so what do you do?
Wouldn’t they be right? You could say that they were wrong but you would be the minority and the majority enforces their idea of right or wrong? Again what basis do you condemn people actions on if every thing is relative? What basses do we act on, or judge on?

Another point to consider is what majority are we talking about? Is right and wrong based off of the majority in a state, or country, or people group, or the world? For example the majority of people in Nazi Germany allowed millions of Jews to be murdered, however the world condemned them and after the war punished many of the German commanders. However they were doing what their country deemed alright. So which group should people go by when they are determining if they should do something?

quote:

Exactly. I wouldn't go so far as to say there are no morals, but I do think there are no universal morals.

If the morals aren’t universal what are they? Can the morals be changed? If they can then they are really no more then what people think should be done.

Let’s take another look at the possibility of there being universal morals. One question that we should look at is what makes people determine certain behaviors to be wrong. Things like sex abuse, murder, and the lack of any freedom has been considered wrong by the majority of people. There are always certain time periods or cultures in which there are exceptions to this but for the most part there is a consensus that certain things are wrong. So what causes all these people to come to the same conclusion? Is there something that makes people see certain types of behavior as wrong?

Also even people that break laws and abuse others usually will say before they commit the crime or after that they acknowledge that type of behavior as wrong. So what tells them that it is wrong? And if they define their own morals why would they define something they do as wrong?

quote:

The point that I am making is that if there is right and wrong, there has to be absolutes.

And I'm saying right and wrong don't exist at all. They are just labels, human-created ideas. Therefore, one group of people can say something is right while another says it's wrong because there is no "right" answer. They're both right according to their morals, which is all there is. It's all subjective.

quote:

In the same way right and wrong do not mean the same thing, they are opposites

Of course that's what they mean, but that's not how they are used. Something I see as right is seen as wrong by someone else. It's neither. We simply see it differently. It's all about opinions. It's my opinion it's right; their opinion it's wrong. That's not contradictory because there is no right answer. Something like gay marriage is neither right nor wrong. It just is. Different groups of people apply their own opinions about what should be right and what should be wrong, according to them.

quote:

Are you familiar with the law of non contradiction?

I am, but I'm saying it doesn't matter here. I know the ideas of right and wrong are diametric opposites. The thing is that this isn't about facts. It's about opinions. I don't know how else to explain it.

quote:

but because our views contradict each other we can’t both be right.

I think I'm beginning to see the hang-up here. I'll say it straight out: there is no "right." We're both right only because our opinions matter to us and us alone. I can no more force my idea of what is right on you than you can force your idea of what is wrong on me. There is no universal "right answer."

quote:

But the state law can be superseded by the federal law. So there is still a standard. Basically our system is set up to give the states a lot of freedom, but there is still bounds and a system set up.

Technically-speaking, federal law shouldn't override state law (the founders wanted states to be somewhat independent, as you pointed out), but again, what of things like brothels and assisted suicide? There are no federal standards governing those, meaning it's up to the states to determine the legal status of such things. Many people find brothels abhorrent and "wrong," but the state of Nevada doesn't find them "wrong" at all, considering they're quite legal there. Certain things may have a federal standard, but not everything (gay marriage is a good example).

quote:

t is meaningless because there really is no such thing as right and wrong, and we don’t know which on of us is right. So if there are morals, there has to be a moral code, or you don’t really have morals.

Exactly. I wouldn't go so far as to say there are no morals, but I do think there are no universal morals. No one is "right." That's the bottom line right there. The only morals that matter are individual morals. If enough individuals with similar morals band together, they can create laws, policies, etc. based on those morals. But there is no universal "right" or "wrong" to things. We can hold different opinions about right and wrong because neither of us is right. Hopefully we've got that misunderstanding cleared up. I wasn't sure how the law of contradictions played in, but you're still hung up on a universal set of morals (which would mean there is a "right" answer to what's right and wrong), but I'm denying that completely. It all really is meaningless.

And this is a really interesting debate. Very philosophical.

quote:

It's definitely an improvement. This topic is actually really fun to read now

It is defiantly interesting.

High everybody. I am leaving tomorrow for seven weeks. During that time I will not be able to get on youth noise so I won’t be able to respond to anything for seven weeks.
Have a great summer.