~  Llamas rule  ~
Thursday, February 7, 2008
whiny muslims at it again
Islamic fanaticisms has always been and always will be: it's built into the religion. The definition of the word Islam itself means 'submission.' They are intolerant of any view other than their own. The most recent example of their extremism is a new complaint against Wikipedia. They demand that all pictures of mohamed be immediately removed from the site.
Story is here.

Well, appropriately, Wikipedia responded with "too bad, so sad."
Since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia with the goal of representing all topics from a neutral point of view, Wikipedia is not censored for the benefit of any particular group.
Freedom wins again.

. . . = = COMMENTS = = . . .

extremism  posted on  Thursday, February 7, 2008

I agree with you that Wikipedia should not be required to remove the images, as it is governed by America. However, I do disagree with your representation of Islam as inherently fanatic. Just as with the bible, there are various factions that claim the Koran to say one thing over another. No one can really agree on the true translation. Thus, people who practice the Muslim religion, as with many religions, have varied views. I think that it is important to understand that people are composed of many shades of gray. Unfortunately, those shades and variations are lost in the media world when only the tails of the bell curve are paid any attention.

retort  posted on  Friday, February 8, 2008

How many Jewish/Buddhist/Christian/Hindu suicide bombers have you ever read about? Oohhh….. riiiiigghhhttt….

extremism  posted on  Sunday, February 10, 2008

Suicide bombing is, again, one form of extremism. I cannot say that other religions have or have not had their share of suicide bombers, but it is not really the point. Instead, the question is, is a religion in which these extremists exist solely made up of extremism, or is this religion like any other, with good, bad and in between? Thus, the Muslim religion does have suicide bombers, but it also has followers who do not subscribe to these extremist views. The picture is not one colour; it's varied. If people begin to pigeonhole an entire group, not only do we lose the beauty of diversity, but we lose the interpersonal connections. Then stereotypes and slander grow, and worse, they are supported and encouraged by these views, so people feel justified in their own narrow-mindedness. Isn't viewing an entire religion as evil based on a faction of the religion just as extreme and harsh? Catholicism could be viewed as equally evil if that were the case. Take a peek through history and see what people have done in the name of God.

the world today  posted on  Wednesday, March 19, 2008

A new article is circulating the internet. It's called "Why the Peaceful Majority is Irrelevant." And it has some very good points.
The argument of interpersonal connections & judgments falls apart when your own life is in danger. The idea of 'diversity' is moronic if death is on the line. We are not talking about the past here. This is not an argument about what muslims did centuries past, or what wars were fought hundreds of years ago. The debate is about what is happening today, not just in Iraq, but all over the Middle East. A stereotype might be 'taboo' here, now, in America, but if you live in Israel or in Iraq, it most definitely may save your life.

- Post is closed to new comments -