Mercnbeth
Posts: 11766
Status: offline
|
People are “of peace” or “of war”. Peoples words and deeds are the indicators of intent. Christianity, Judaism, are defined by their deed of their followers, often undertaken because of a ‘leaders’ personal interpretation of their words. There is nothing to fear from a Christian or Jew or Muslim individual. There should be great fear if a group of individuals, from any camp, agree on interpreting words in such a manner that excludes any consideration for an alternative to their dogma. We saw it historically with Jews and Christians, we are living through it with Islam. The common ground is they justify their activities in the name of god, and have no conscience of bastardizing the interpretation of ancient text to support their position.
I don’t know if there is debate that ‘religion’ is a loose term. To some being a liberal or conservative, or Democrat or Republican is a more religion than philosophy determined upon observable facts. You can determine if a person’s position is based upon religious faith. Factors of ‘infallibility surface. Compromise isn’t possible. Logical argument and debate isn’t possible once crude name calling identifies those ‘outside’ the religion and answers such as “because it’s written”, or “because my leader/founder said so” are part of the dogma.
It’s with that consideration in mind that I pose the only historical religion that compares to Islam, the Nazi Party in pre-WWII Germany. I am not comparing the two on the basis of their activities. The Nazis in Germany have no comparison in their atrocities. They are an example of humanity's "worse case" scenario. The followers of Islam do not warrant such a comparison. I’m comparing them philosophically and in terms of a small minority making a global impact.
The population in Germany at the onset of WWII was 69 Million. When it came to power in 1933 the Nazi Party had over 2 million members. Once in power, it attracted many more members and by the time of its dissolution it had 8.5 million members. Many of these were nominal members who joined for careerist reasons, but the party nevertheless had an active membership of at least a million, including virtually all the holders of senior positions in the national government. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party
Calculating the math using the height of it’s membership, the Nazi party represented 12% of Germany. A little less more than 1 out of ten were official members of the party. Many were members only in name. Compare it to the current worldwide Muslim population of 1.76 Billion. Source: http://www.islamicpopulation.com/world_islam.html
What if the same 12% identify themselves as “fundamentalists” or “Islamo-Fascists”? If that were true there are 144 Million subscribing to the policies of the radical arm of the Muslim Religion. I don’t believe in that number, but I ask you to put a number on the question, how many Muslims are in agreement and would activity participate in the ‘war’ called for by vocal fundamentalist Islamic leaders such as bin Laden, Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or the policy setting Mullahs? Instead of 1 of 10, would it be 1 in 25, 1 in a 1,000, 10,000? At 1 in 10,000 the result is 120,000 who would; die at the request of their leaders killing infidels, fly planes into buildings, encourage children to blow themselves up, stone woman who dare walk around without a burka or arrest her for driving a car, beat men for missing prayer meetings, dance in the streets when the publisher of a cartoon is murdered.
It takes only 0.71% of the Islamic population to reach the 8.5 Million that subscribed to Nazi philosophy.
What would be the impact of a global religious war against Islam? Again looking at history, the total estimated human loss of life caused by World War II, irrespective of political alignment, was roughly 62 million people. The civilian toll was around 37 million, the military toll about 25 million.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
A country of 69 Million people, 12% of them Nazis, resulted in 62 Million dead and countless others injured and maimed throughout the world. If you want to contribute half that number to the Japanese side of the ledger it doesn’t change the basic argument, or the impact of a radical minority on the world stage.
What’s missing? Why hasn’t the ‘war’ gone from local skirmishes to global? I’ll point again to Germany for the answer. There has yet to be a ‘charismatic’ leader in the Muslim world. As of yet, they have no Hitler. Maybe Saddam was trying to reach that status. Ahmadinejad may be attempting to become the equivalent. Should he, or someone else, arise to light the fuse how can the world survive? What is more likely, a charismatic Islamic leader, or Islam policing and distancing themselves from the radical minority among them? The ‘Catch 22’ is contained as a fundamental Islamic principle. It is against Islamic dogma to criticize any activity of any Muslim. This fact makes the possibility of a change coming from within remote.
God, and the decision how to follow him or if he exists at all should be personal. Following a certain faith shouldn’t exclude any other. Places of religious service should be collection points for the voluntary redistribution of wealth, and havens for those unable to care for themselves. There is no ‘one true’ religion, no good religion, no evil religion. There are evil people.
|
No Religion of Peace. No Religion of War - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread