"Well, Nadine makes some interesting claims that Islamic beliefs include forcing conversion among non-believers, and if they won't convert forcing them to pay some social tax (whatever a dhimmi is??). Do you believe those are misrepresentations of Islamic teachings? If so, it would be interesting to read a counter point argument to them. In other words, go ahead and explain why her allegation that Islam does not respect other cultures is incorrect. We certainly don't want her as the spokesperson for Islamic values and teachings! So go ahead, prove her wrong."
I am not a spokesperson for Islam. But Nadine is propagandizing because she knows that she could speak this way to any group of Muslims in America and they would tell her that this does not represent them. She also seems to be as scholar of history and one who conveniently politicizes history to exploit her political venue in modern times.
How so?
Her representation of Islamic enslavery/subjugation is out of context and inapplicable for our culture in modern times and circumstances. She is talking about Islamic Government that existed in history and how groups of people who were hosted under those governments were dealt with in volatile times of Emperors, Kings, conquerers and and such. Or, she is mixing issues from other Cultures like Arabia with Western culture in ways that manage to misrepresent a billion or so people living in modern times.
Historically, if you can show me a religious culture that supported groups to maintain their belief systems under their protection while hostile groups had goals to annihilate them, prosper in business, and to freely come and go as they pleased I will be impressed. That is the case and circumstance in which this model was established in history. Most/all were much more brutal, intolerant, and slavery oriented. Check out the history of religious governments of that period, yours hers or others and show me it aint so.
If a Muslim joined a YMCA for the swim team, do you think they should pay dues? Do you think they should be on the board of directors defining the policy, mission, and rules for the Young Men's Christian Association? The swimmer would be protected from unfair treatment according to the Athletic swim team rules with regards to any associations the YMCA is in competition with. What ever awards, recognition, etc the swimmer was able to accomplish could be taken with him for beneficial purposes when/if he decides to leave the YMCA. He of course would be encouraged to convert to Christianity but would be allowed to choose. This person, while in the YMCA, would rightfully be treated as a dhimmi, if the integrity and mission of the YMCA is to remain in tact. Do you label that 'Slavery', how about 'immoral'?
"A dhimmi (Arabic: ???, collectively: ??? ?????, ahl al-dhimma, the people of the dhimma or pact of protection, Ottoman Turkish zimmi) was a free, non-Muslim subject of a state governed in accordance with sharia — Islamic law. A dhimmi is a person of the dhimma, a term which refers in Islamic law to a pact contracted between non-Muslims and authorities from their Muslim government."
If you study your history you will see that the Islamic governments that hosted non-Muslims were the most accommodating in this fashion and far from slavery, allowed non-Muslim subcultures to thrive and prosper until they were ready to relocate, if they so chose. Paying for the government that is hosting you is not subjugation and it is nearly inapplicable to modern circumstances.
What about brutality, oppression, tyranny in Islamic cultures. Of course it exists, it probably exists in your non-islamic neighborhood too. But some Islamic governments are guilty of endorsing this type of venue as well. They are corrupt as are non-Islamic governments that have inhumane policies.
What about being forced to convert to Islam. Coercion in religion is forbidden in the Quran. Of course people and governments never tire of finding creative ideas to coerce others into obedience. However:
Freedom of religion is laid down in the Quran itself: "There is no compulsion (or coercion) in the religion (Islam). The right direction is distinctly clear from error". (2:256) Christian missionary, T.W. Arnold had this opinion on his study of the question of the spread of Islam: ".. of any organized attempt to force the acceptance of Islam on the non-Muslim population, or of any systematic persecution intended to stamp out the Christian religion, we hear nothing. Had the caliphs chosen to adopt either course of action, they might have swept away Christianity as easily as Ferdinand and Isabella drove Islam out of Spain, or Louis XIV made Protestanism ..."
From 'TOP TEN MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT ISLAM'
jannah.org
You should at least have the top ten down pat if you are going to join the bigot bandwagon so enthusiastically.
Speaking only for myself, as always,
Gem |
