Islam: Relax, It’s Just A Religion

On May 20, the article ‘Draw Muhammad Day: Censorship, Sabotage, Threats and Murder‘, elicited hundreds of passionate responses. Some were reasonable and well considered, but, unfortunately, many were not. Charges of racism and ethnocentricity, by Muslims, because people drew pictures of Muhammad, as well as some comments that actually were racist and ethnocentric, littered the comment section.

To charge someone who speaks against Islam with being a racist, or ethnocentric, is the same as considering someone who speaks against Christianity, as anti-white, or anti-American. Both of these religions have adherents from every race, nationality, and ethnicity. Conversely, no ethnicity, race, or nationality, is composed of a population with anything close to 100% agreement on theology, philosophy or ideology. Even in a society claiming 90% Christian or Muslim adherents, within that 90%, the sectarian differences are often as disparate as those between a sect of one religion, and a denomination of the other.

These religions and ideologies, along with their accompanying dogma and political prescriptions, are choices. They are not inherent, or unchangeable, qualities of a being. To claim adherence to a religion is done regardless of ones physical traits, race, or ethnicity; and, to criticize a religion, should be done with the same disregard for those factors. To scrutinize, and criticize, the writings of Muhammad, is no more an attack on Arabic people than criticizing Christianity, or Buddhism, should be misconstrued as an attack against Americans, or the Nepalese.

Even when a country imposes a state religion, it cannot mandate or define the beliefs of every individual that lives within it’s borders; try though it may. The individual retains the power to choose to comply, agree, deny or rebel. It is impossible to legislate, or otherwise demand, the religious, or ideological, conscience of another. People will only believe what they choose to believe.

To assert that Muhammad was a travelling salesman, who created a cult to gain power, and committed heinous crimes against humanity, is simply one individuals interpretation of the available facts, or perhaps, is just their opinion. It is of no real effect to anyone who chooses to believe otherwise, and makes no derogatory statements of anyone based on their particular race, nationality, or ethnicity. Likewise, to assert that Jesus is a constructed figure, based on an anti-establishment socialist, and merged with the astrologically based mythology of Horus, in no way equates to an insult against any nationality, ethnicity, or race.

Religion is not culture. Religion exists within a culture. Insulting a religion is not the same as insulting a culture.

To criticize Islam, or Christianity, is not an indictment, or insult, against an entire culture. A Pakistani person, born, raised, and educated, in Pakistan, who chooses to believe in Christianity, Buddhism, or Hinduism, is just as much a Pakistani person, culturally, as the Pakistani Muslim. Therefore, respectfully using Pakistan as an example, to question the teachings of Islam should not be considered an attack on Pakistan, or the Pakistani culture. Likewise, to argue against Christianity should in no way be considered an insult against Americans.

Faith is not a quality of being. There are many people in the world unable to have faith in what they consider indefensible claims. These people come from every country, race, and ethnicity on the planet. Faith requires the acceptance of something as truth, despite lack of evidence, and in the case of religion, often in the face of contrary evidence. As Mark Twain once said, “Faith is the act of believing what you know ain’t so.” For many people, this proposition is not simply insulting, but impossible.

An individual has the right to objectively consider, analyze, critique, or even disrespect, an idea, or belief. Ideas are advanced through criticism and debate. Progress is born out of conflict, as much as it is out of cooperation. The conflict of ideas, causes the analyses that brings understanding. To deny challenge is to preclude rational discourse and progress.

To be the adherent to a religion such as Christianity, or Islam, and mock the tenets of the other faith based religion, is a feat of mental gymnastics, difficult to comprehend. To be the adherent of either religion, and mock the other, not only on it’s tenets, but based on the ethnicity or race one associates with that religion, displays a form of psychological self-stimulation that benefits nothing.

A religion may be shared by a large group of people, of a certain ethnicity or nationality, yet this does not make it an inherent quality of that ethnicity or religion. A religion may be shared by a large group of people of a certain race, yet this does not make it an inherent quality of that race. Religion is a personal choice. It is not a quality of being.

Draw Muhammad Day was about freedom of speech, and an individuals right to challenge the idea of a god without being threatened, or forced, into compliance with another person’s ideology. It was not about race, ethnicity or nationality. It was about ideas, and the freedom to have them, and express them.

None of us has the right to not be offended. To be offended is to make a personal choice; a subjective judgement. We decide if something offends us. If an idea offends us, we can choose to dismiss it, debate it, counter it, ignore it, or ridicule it. We can not silence it by threatening or harming its proponents.

For someone to criticize Muhammad, or Christ, is not the same as criticizing a person that chooses to have faith in them. One may find it offensive that another criticizes what one cares so much about, but it is very different than someone criticizing an individual, a culture, an ethnic group, or a race.

To be impacted by another person’s new, or differing, idea, is not the same as being impacted by another person’s fist, blade, or bullet. Contradictory ideas, or beliefs, are not assaults against a person and cannot be responded to with violence. Reacting violently to an idea, image, text, or any other medium of peaceful, yet perhaps offensive to some, expression of an idea, is a choice. It is the choice of the person who acted violently, not of the person who expressed an idea that someone else deemed offensive. Violence is not the appropriate response to peace.

To draw Muhammad was not an idea created to insult Muslims, let alone anyone of a certain ethnicity, nationality, or race. The goal was to express support for the rights of free speech, and freedom of expression, regardless of who may be offended. The goal was not to offend. The goal was to make a statement, irrespective of who may choose to be offended by it. To draw Muhammad was a statement by individuals that will not allow their freedom of speech, or their freedom to express and challenge ideas, to be censored, or silenced.

Drawing Muhammad was a peaceful protest against the threats, violence, and murder of those who have expressed their ideas peacefully. A violent reaction to a peaceful expression is not appropriate. A violent reaction to a peaceful protest, about a violent reaction to a peaceful expression, is absolutely ridiculous.

Islam is an idea. It is a theology. It is been used to develop a political system. Islam is not an ethnicity, race or nationality. Islam is a choice. Islam is just a religion.


33 Responses to Islam: Relax, It’s Just A Religion

  1. Shiva May 23, 2010 at 9:47 am

    So very true Liam.

    This reminds me of people who bash and are afraid of DNA study advancement and of man playing god.

    if your faith in your god is so weak that a drawing or medical advances will minimize that god, then you must do a reality check on your beliefs

    and while you are at it, retaliation against others who don’t believe the same as you does not advance your cause.

    • Liam Fox May 23, 2010 at 10:35 am

      Thank you. A peaceful war of ideas can only benefit us all. Although I was addressing the fallout from Draw Muhammad Day, and the article weighs a little heavier towards Islamic views, those points, as you’ve mentioned, are definitely shared by other religions as well. Religions cannot demand tolerance and return intolerance. Peaceful ideas cannot be met with violent reactions..

      • Oliver May 27, 2010 at 10:34 pm

        “A peaceful war of ideas” – the question is, of course, of mockery is peaceful and not, in fact, aggression. You suggest that religions demand tolerance and return intolerance but yet you to precisely the same: You demand tolerance not just for “objective” (a rather naive word, anyway) criticism, but actually for mockery but are unwilling to tolerate if people get upset about it. The problem is precisely that you demand that all others live by rules which you, and only you, define. And that’s simply not how it works – not in a real world, where people have patience with limits and dignity they feel attacked, and not in a democratic system, where not the individual but society as a whole sets the rules. Demanding tolerance for one’s own fault while having none for those of others isn’t particularly mature behaviour.

  2. veganpanda May 23, 2010 at 11:33 am

    Great article Liam 🙂

    I particularly liked this phrase that you used…
    “Violence is not the appropriate response to peace.”

    I personally didn’t draw Muhammed on that day, not because I’m religious as I’m too sensible for that, just because I couldn’t be bothered quite honestly. Although I believe we have every right to draw Muhammed, Jesus or any other religious figure we feel like & those who are seen to be threatening or carrying out violence should be cautioned or arrested.

    Violent acts against the peaceful (no matter who’s responsible), should not be tolerated at all…

  3. Noble9 May 23, 2010 at 11:44 am

    Islam is a religion, but it is not “just” a religion for some. In western democracies with religious freedom it is another of the many faiths practiced. In countries with Sharia law, however, it is a non-negotiable way of life. In Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Oman, and many others, insulting the Prophet Mohammed is one of the many religious crimes with a potential death sentence.

    • Liam Fox May 23, 2010 at 1:15 pm

      Your key word is ‘for some’. It is ‘just a religion’. It’s doctrines have been used as a political system, as Christians would, given the chance. It doesn’t change the fact that it is still just a religion. If a government mandates a religion, it can only govern behavior. It cannot govern thought.

      • ChristopherL May 23, 2010 at 11:46 pm

        Point out the worldwide Christian movement, looking to impose a barbaric set of religious laws on all.

  4. Bruce D. Marsh May 23, 2010 at 12:44 pm

    You could not be more wrong. Did you notice how the Yemeni cleric, who helped promote the Fort Hood shootings, said to the world it is ok to kill american civilians because Muhammad often sent troops into battle who then killed civilians? Muhammad was a mass murderer. Islam was a headchopping warrior cult from the start.

    Some religions are evil by intention. The Aztecs had a religion where the cut the beating heart out of a living victim, showed it to them in the seconds before the lost conciousness and then threw the heart down the temple steps. But, hey relax, IT IS JUST RELIGION…unless you are the victim!!!!!

    Muslim children have the right to know that they are the victims of cult psychology and that islamic true believers are mentally ill. Islam is an induced mental illness designed to motivate muhammads bedouin warriors, nothing more.

    • Liam Fox May 23, 2010 at 1:37 pm

      Read the article again. The title is a message to those that would act violently in the name of their religion…. Relax, it’s just a religion. It is not condoning or ignoring the atrocities committed. It is saying STOP. It is telling the fundamentalists and fanatics to stop, relax, it’s just a religion, you can not impose it on others and attack those that don’t agree. You cannot site ancient Aztec rituals and ignore the more recent atrocities of Christian inquisition in order to call only some religions evil. Religions cannot force their ideologies on others or threaten or harm those that don’t comply. It must all stop. Relax: It’s Just Rreligion.

      • The Infidel Alliance May 25, 2010 at 1:54 am

        Dear Mr. Fox,

        Yes, you can ignore the inquisition when citing savage Aztec rituals, because the atrocities of the Inquisition has nothing to do with the teachings and examples of Christ, whereas ripping the beating heart out of a living human has everything to do with the savage Aztec religion.

        I challenge you or anyone to cite a single example of Jesus inciting, condoning or perfoming Aztec or Inquisition type violence, enslavement, torture, rape, murder or genocide against anyone. You can’t. It’s not there.

        But you CAN cite example after example of Muhammed inciting, condoning and performing those evil acts, and example after example of Allah sanctioning Muhammeds barbaric crimes.

        When an Islamic apologist bemoans jihadist violence as having nothing to do with Islam, he is lying. Brutality and violence are ingrained in the very DNA of Islam. Violence and Islam are inseperable, which is what makes Islam evil.

        Jesus (the Christ of Christianity) was not evil, nor were his teachings or actions.

        The Aztec ‘religion’ was evil.

        Muhammed (the ‘holy’ prophet of Islam, was evil as were his teachings and actions.

        Islam is evil.

        ~The Infidel Alliance

  5. ChristopherL May 23, 2010 at 11:45 pm

    Islam is more than a religion, it is a complete way of life. One of the problems is that Muslim believe that Islamic Law is for all, and they are hell bent on imposing it on us.

    For more on the issue.

  6. Davi Catleugh May 24, 2010 at 1:20 am

    “It’s Just A Religion”.
    If only that was true.

  7. The Infidel Alliance May 24, 2010 at 4:57 am

    Dear Mr. Fox,

    I enjoy reading your thoughtful commentaries, but I have to agree with our follow commentator ‘Bruce D. Marsh’ who lucidly and accurately points out that some social systems, like the brutal Aztecs, are simply evil.

    I don’t think you would find too many people, for example, who would argue that Hitler’s NAZI movement was not evil to its very core.

    My point here is that ALL of the various cultural or theological divisions of Islam are all bound by a common element, the first pillar of Islam, the Shahada: “lâ ilâha illallâh, Mu?ammadur rasûlullâh” / “There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is his Messenger”

    This core tenet reveals the first and most fatal flaw of Islam as an evil religious/moral code.

    Simply put, Islamic source texts, the Koran, Ahadith and Sirah Rasul Allah, record in grisly detail the sadistic barbarity of Muhammed. As documented, Muhammed was a murderer, rapist, slaver, mass decapitator, mutilating butcher, torturer, amputator, sex trafficker, child rapist, perfidious liar, a looting stealing thief, a misogynist, a perverted sex addict, a genocidist and self proclaimed terrorist.

    These are FACTS about Muhammed, which by any rational, objective standard are vile manifestations of the worst of human nature. Yet, Allah clearly states in Koran 68:4 al-Qalam (The Pen): “Wa-innaka laAAala khuluqin AAatheemin” or “You Muhammed are blessed with a great moral character.” Please note that 14 different translations of this Surah interpret it the same way.

    Islam maintains that the Koran is the direct, unalterable, immutable word of Allah, spewed from the mouth of his illiterate messenger Muhammed.

    Thus, of all the decent, righteous human beings in the 6th & 7th century world, for some reason the God of Islam selected a sadistic criminal as his ‘holy phophet’ and sanctified his barbarity, crimes and sin as the moral foundation for his ‘one true religion’.

    When laid out, this is the only conclusion one can reach, especially when we understand that Muhammed’s largely peaceful Meccan preachings were abrogated and supplanted by the savagely base and violent mandates of his Medinan period.

    In summary:
    1) Allah either sanctifies Muhammeds barbaric behavior as the moral foundation of Islam, or
    2) The Koran is NOT the direct, unalterable, immutable word of Allah and is corrupted and false, or
    3) Allah was wrong or lying.

    In any case, this clearly illustrates that the cornerstone of Islamic theology is primal violence and thus is innately evil, and the claim of Islam being a ‘religion of peace’ collapses under the weight of the TRUTH.

    Just like the Aztecs. Just like the NAZI’s. Just like the Khmer Rouge. Islam is simply evil.

    ~ The Infidel Alliance

    • Liam Fox May 24, 2010 at 11:51 am

      As I said before, those charges can be made against any religion. And, the message of ‘Relax, It’s just a Religion’ is a message to the fanatics that try to make it so much more and impose it on others. Perhaps if the title were longer ‘ Hey, Islam: Stop threatening and hurting others if they don’t agree with your religion, there are lots of religions and world views and yours is just one of them. To disagree with you is not racist, cultural, or ethnocentric. It is only disagreeing with your religion.’ Does that help?

      • mammal May 24, 2010 at 6:28 pm

        Well, your editor might’ve taken issue with it, but I rather like your expanded title.


        Thanks, Liam.

      • Oliver May 27, 2010 at 10:39 pm

        Except “Islam” isn’t threatening and hurting others, and it is precisely this suggestion that it is which is rightfully criticised as hate-speech. The argument you make has precisely NOTHING to do with religion and so your excuse that it could be made for any religion is invalid. As I explained in the comments on your other unfortunate article: It’s a simple issue of statistics. And you can jump up and down and complain as much as you want: The fact that if you have just enough people, you have a sizeable number of crackpots among them willing to resort to violence is totally independent of which religion, if any, they adhere to. It’s simply sheer numbers.

      • mammal May 29, 2010 at 3:52 pm

        Well, you’re right in one sense, Oliver. It’s true that “Islam” isn’t hurting anyone, because “Islam” is just a word. I can say the word a hundred times in a row… nothing happens.

        Imagine that… Words Don’t Hurt People. Hmmm… there’s a lesson there, somewhere.

        However, “Islam” is not merely a word. It is a set of ideas, beliefs, concepts, and commands. It is an all-encompassing philosophy. And many elements and ideas within it are deeply disturbing, brutal, barbaric, and dangerous. Put enough people together who all claim to believe in this philosophy, and some number of them will, in fact, act in accordance with those beliefs and commands, regardless of the sickening nature of those acts. You try to say that it is merely a fringe element, not the “true” Islam. But I say that you’ve got it backwards. That “fringe” element is entirely predictable. It is not surprising that some number of people will reject common sense and morality, in favor of a barbaric set of rules laid out in a man-made, 7th-century book.

        Oliver: “The argument you make has precisely NOTHING to do with religion…”

        All we’ve been talking about is religion and people who behave violently due to their religious beliefs. The violence which occurred (and has continued to occur) in response to the original Muhammad cartoons was committed exclusively by Muslims. Neither Jews, Buddhists, nor Zoroastrians were rioting in the streets, burning buildings, and killing innocent individuals in response to a few questionable cartoons.

        Cartoons which, we should remember, were drawn and published thousands of miles from where the most significant acts of violence took place.

        Why did the cartoons become so widely known in the Muslim world? Because prominent Islamic leaders spread the word, far and wide, about these cartoons. These religious leaders intentionally incited the riots and violence amongst their religious followers. It was based upon religion, religion, and ONLY religion. Only a religious person — specifically, a Muslim — would take any offense, whatsoever, upon learning that a particular drawing was intended as a representation of some guy named Muhammad. (And not just a nasty, insulting drawing… ANY drawing!) People of other religions wouldn’t be offended. Why would they care? And people who have no religion would probably just shake their heads and wonder why it is that some folks get so insanely, violently bent out of shape over a stupid cartoon.

        Finally, if this “fringe” of which you speak is really such a tiny number of people, why don’t the overwhelming majority of Muslims rise up, speak out, and condemn the disgusting behavior of those who claim to act in their names? Why don’t ALL of the clerics and imams and ayatollahs speak out with a unified voice and loudly declare that these actions, these people, these groups are not acting in accordance with the teachings of Islam? That they are, in fact, acting completely contrary to this perfect religion of perfect peace? So contrary, in fact, that their actions are seen as an open declaration of apostasy and that, therefore, these individuals are declared to no longer be Muslims? (Their apostasy would effectively be a sentence of death, since the Qur’an is quite specific that apostates must be killed… peacefully, of course.)

        Why aren’t such declarations commonplace? For that matter, can you show me even one (with or without the declaration of apostasy)? Please? I’d truly like to see it.

        This entire thing is about religion. It certainly isn’t about Arabs (or any other ethnicity). Most Muslims are not Arabs.

  8. James May 24, 2010 at 10:38 am

    Liam well takes on patriarchal religions, which are dominated (ouch!) by a power-over worldview. In a pluralistic culture, all perspectives are encouraged. In a monotheistic culture, such as proposed by orthodox Christian, Jewish, or Muslim beliefs, no such diversity exists and dissent is actively suppressed. It is said that Christianity likely set back the social and technological evolution of the West – and the world – by perhaps as much as 500-1000 years. Humankind can simply not afford to permit religious leaders the power to oppress social progress nor to impede the institutions or foundations of civil society. To do so is to risk a 21st century age of intellectual and human repression that humanity does not need or want.

  9. Chase Chatham May 24, 2010 at 11:40 am

    Anyone who thinks that culture is deeper than religion needs to really look at how Islam works. Islam is meant to underlie culture, i.e. religion is more important than worldly things like culture, music, language, etc…

    • Liam Fox May 24, 2010 at 11:56 am

      To use a religion to establish a theocracy does not add qualities to the religion, it just takes away from society. Even if a society allows a religion to dictate every aspect of it’s character, it’s still just a religion… and a society that has allowed itself to be devastated.

  10. rick May 24, 2010 at 11:57 am

    These caricatures are the beginning of the process of bringing the
    truth about Muhammad to the light. So far Muhammadanism survived
    because anyone who dared to criticize it was killed. With the advent of
    Internet, everyone will know that Muhammad had sex with 9 years old
    girls while he was 55 himself. Soon everyone will know that Muhammad
    and his Allah commanded his followers to beat women with a stick. That
    he murdered some 800 unarmed Jews, raped countless women, had sex with
    his own daughter in law, tortured a man to death and then “married” his
    wife same day. (He also killed her brothers and father earlier.
    unlike Jesus, Buddha, Zarathustra, Moses, Lao T’se, cannot withstand
    criticism. Free speech is the death of Islam, and Muslims will do
    everything in their power to prevent it. They killed Theo Van Gogh, and
    many others.

    • Oliver May 27, 2010 at 10:49 pm

      I would suggest you re-read the old testament again. The mass slaughter therein is of epic proportions. Stating “Muslims killed Theo Van Gogh, and many others” is quite interesting. What about all those killed by Christians? What about the mass slaughters of indigenous people in Africa, Asia and America by people who wanted to bring “culture” to the uncivilized? What about two world wars and the atrocities committed by the regime that brought about the second?

      Whitewashing one’s own responsibilities while attacking those of others and attributing the acts of individuals to a group as a whole is merely testimony of one’s hatred.

  11. Victor May 24, 2010 at 12:38 pm

    Great article, and I agree 100%

  12. Kwende Idrissa Madu May 24, 2010 at 6:31 pm

    Quite frankly I’m sick of these stupid fanatics who feel that they can impose sharia on the better part of humanity by violence and terror. If they want to move to Saudi Arabia and live under the dictates of their backwards religon, fine but when they are in the civillized world they will respect our laws and conduct themselves accordingly.

    • Oliver May 27, 2010 at 10:45 pm

      And I am sick of people incapable of using high school level maths and abusing their own ignorance as a justification for hate-speech against others. If anything is backwater, it’s your education, but not a religion that over a billion people on the planet adhere to. Not that I’m an adherent, but talking about “civilized nations” while one’s own mental horizon stops at one’s doorstep and talking about the laws of civilized nations while one has no respect for any but those of one’s own nation is sheer and unadulterated jingoism of the worst kind and has precious little to do with civilized behaviour. Not to start most of the nations adhering to Islam had a strongly developed civilization long before such was common anywhere else.

  13. Geoff May 24, 2010 at 7:52 pm

    Very well written and argued. I agree completely.

    I wish I could write that well.

  14. The Infidel Alliance May 25, 2010 at 2:37 am

    Dear Mr. Fox,

    As to have a better understanding of your perspective, I’d like to ask a couple of personal questions if I may.

    1) Do you believe that evil exists? Does it exist in the modern world?

    2) How do you define evil?

    3) Should we resist evil or just let it exist?


    ~The Infidel Alliance

  15. PatRobertson May 25, 2010 at 6:02 am

    Muhammed is a cunt..

    • mammal May 25, 2010 at 10:49 am

      PatRobertson is just a jealous little psychopath.

  16. The Infidel Alliance May 25, 2010 at 8:46 am

    Dear Mr. Fox,

    Thank you for your answers.

    I agree, evil is something we are all capable of, a manifestation of or devolution to the animal side of our human nature. But our evil potential is just that, potential. It is not evil until it is expressed in some overt act. Agree?

    By your Merriam-Webster definition, you MUST agree that Muhammed was an evil man, based on his long list of recorded crimes, sins and trangressions. You certainly wouldn’t defend a sociopathic murdering, rapist, slaver, torturing, decapitating, child molesting, looting thief, terrorist, genocidist. Correct?

    Does it not follow then that the moral code (‘religion’) espoused by this evil man would be evil too?

    You sort of obliquely agree that we should resist evil, and I agree that we not committ evil acts ourselves, but how does one fight or resist evil?

    I think the best way to fight evil is to:
    1) identify it
    2) expose it
    3) speak out forcefully and relentlessly against it
    4) destroy the foundation that supports it

    Millions of ‘infidel’ Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Zoroastrians, athiests, pagans, women and homosexuals have suffered under Muhammeds sword, but the biggest victims of Islam have been Muslims themselves.

    Muslims must submit to Islam, thus are denied the most fundamental of human rights – freedom of speech and freedom of conscience. And, importantly, they are denied the right to unconditionally love their fellow man. They are inducted into Muhammeds evil cult at birth, without choice or consent, and without opportunity to criticize, reject or leave under the death penalty for apostacy.

    That is why I am so passionate about exposing Muhammed and the truth about Islam. Calling Muhammed a ‘holy prophet’ is the greatest, most repulsive, most dangerous frauds ever perpetrated on humanity.

    You have a powerful venue and a rational voice. I hope you will be true to your values and continue to identify, expose, speak out and destroy the evil that is Muhammed and Islam with its most feared weapon – the TRUTH.

    Best regards,

    ~The Infidel Alliance

    • mammal May 25, 2010 at 11:00 am

      “By your Merriam-Webster definition, you MUST agree that Muhammed was an evil man, based on his long list of recorded crimes, sins and trangressions…. Does it not follow then that the moral code (‘religion’) espoused by this evil man would be evil too?”

      No. It does not necessarily follow.

      A person can espouse a philosophy of pure love, yet act in evil, hateful ways. This does not make the philosophy evil and hateful. It simply makes the person an outrageous hypocrite (as well as a hateful evildoer).

      However, the philosophy and teachings contained within the Qur’an are NOT those of pure love and acceptance of others. The Qur’an repeatedly condones and supports oppression, torture, slavery, rape, and murder. (Amongst “holy books”, the Qur’an is hardly unique in this aspect.)

    • Liam Fox May 25, 2010 at 8:55 pm

      I would like to discuss at length. There is much to say and I believe we will find many points to agree on. Mammal also makes great points I want to incorporate into an answer. I am, literally, in the middle of moving. I will come back to this comment section on the weekend, or find me on twitter @liam_fox . I don’t want to let this discussion go, but I cannot give it what it deserves right now. I hope that both of you understand. I look forward to discussing this in a few days.

      • mammal May 26, 2010 at 9:24 pm

        Thanks, Liam. I’ll check back in a day or three.

        Peace. 8~D

You must be logged in to post a comment Login