Islam.

[aalia_12]

Not many people here about the Islamic Empire....you know...if I had never become interested in the Middle Ages, the Crusades in particular, I wouldn't have either. The reason they don't talk about this Empire is because it would make Islam look bad. Please excuse me as I find maps to compare the largest CHRISTIAN Empire to the Islamic Empire, Alexander's Empire to the Islamic Empire, Rome to the Islamic Empire. Then...I think I'll elaborate on the beginnings of the religion that is Islam. Muhammed? Not a very good man, extremely far from it. http://www.bullshit.com/images/smilies/cool.gif

http://www.harpercollege.edu/mhealy/geogres/maps/nwgif/muslmwor.gif
ROMAN EMPIRE
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ca/roman_empire_map.png

.

[Carrot]

In fact, the islamic empire was far ahead of it's time in terms of science, maths, medicine and trade when compared to the rest of the civilisations at the time. It's broadly known as the golden age of islam.

Alchemy, algebra etc stem from arabic words. at the begininning means "the".

[Limbo]

In fact, the islamic empire was far ahead of it's time in terms of science, maths, medicine and trade when compared to the rest of the civilisations at the time. It's broadly known as the golden age of islam.

Alchemy, algebra etc stem from arabic words. at the begininning means "the".

The Myth of the Islamic Golden Age of Science:

Muslims often claim that their religion fostered a rich heritage of scientific discovery, “paving the way” for modern advances in technology and medicine. On this topic, they usually refer to the period between the 7th and 13th centuries, when Europe was experiencing its “Dark Ages” and the Muslim world was conquering new populations and culture.

The Truth:

Although there is no arguing that the Muslim world was relatively more advanced during this period than the “Christian” world, the reasons for this have absolutely nothing to do with the Islamic religion (other than its mandate for military expansion). In fact, the religion actively discourages knowledge outside of itself, which is why the most prolific Muslim scholars throughout history tend to be students of religion rather than science.

There are four basic reasons why Islam has little true claim to scientific achievement:

First, the Muslim world benefited greatly from the Greek sciences, which were translated for them by Christians and Jews. To their credit, Muslims did a better job of preserving Greek text than did the Europeans of the time and this became the foundation for their own knowledge. (One large reason for this, however, was that access by Christians to this part of their world was cut off by Muslim slave ships and coastal raids that dominated the Mediterranean during this period).

Secondly, many of the scientific advances credited to Islam were actually “borrowed” from other cultures conquered by the Muslims. The algebraic concept of “zero”, for example, is erroneously attributed to Islam, but it was, in fact, a Hindu discovery that was merely introduced to the West by Muslims.

In fact, conquered populations contributed greatly to the history of “Muslim science” until gradually being decimated by conversion to Islam (under the pressures of dhimmitude). The Muslim concentration within a population is directly proportional to the decline of scientific achievement. It is no accident that the Muslim world has had little to show for itself in the last 800 years or so, since running out of new civilizations to cannibalize.

Third, even the great Muslim scientists and icons were often considered heretics in their time, sometimes for good reason. One of the greatest achievers to come out of the Muslim world was the Persian scientist and philosopher, al-Razi. His impressive works are often held up today as “proof” of Muslim accomplishment. But what the apologists often leave out is that al-Razi was denounced as a blasphemer, since he followed his own religious beliefs – which were in obvious contradiction to traditional Islam.

Fourth, even the contributions that are attributed to Islam (often inaccurately) are not terribly dramatic. There is the invention of certain words, such as alchemy and elixir, but not much else that survives in modern technology that is of any practical significance. Neither is there any reason to believe that such discoveries would not have easily been made by the West following the cultural awakening triggered by the Reformation.

As an example of this, consider that Muslims claim credit for coffee, since the beans were discovered in Africa (at the time, an important venue for Islamic slave trading) and first processed in the Middle East. While this is true, it is also true that the red dye used in many food products, from cranberry juice to candy, comes from the abdomen of a particular female beetle found in South America. It is extremely unlikely that the West would not have stumbled across coffee by now (although, to be fair, coffee probably expedited subsequent discoveries).

In fact, the litany of “Muslim” achievement often takes the form of rhapsody, in which the true origins of these discoveries are omitted - along with their comparative significance to Western achievement. One often doesn't hear about the dismal fate of original accomplishments either. Those who brag about the great observatory of Taqi al-Din in [freshly conquered] Istanbul, for example, often neglect to mention that it was quickly destroyed by the caliphate.

At the end of the day, scientific, medical and technological accomplishment is not something over which Muslim apologists want to get into a pissing contest with the Christian world. Today’s Islamic innovators are primarily known for turning Western technology, such as cell phones and airplanes, into instruments of mass murder.

To sum up, although the Islamic religion is not entirely hostile to science, neither should it be confused as a facilitator. The great achievements that are said to have come out of the Islamic world were made either by non-Muslims who happened to be under Islamic rule, or by heretics who usually had little interest in Islam. Scientific discovery tapers off dramatically as Islam asserts dominance, until it eventually peters out altogether.

[Carrot]

What ,did you have that saved to your hard drive? And it's obviously biased as it seems it's a reply to someone claiming islam is a peaceful and knowledgable one, rather than looking at an empire which happened to be islamic however many years ago - see the cellphone bit, covers invasions etc.

It's well documented that the islamic empire at that time did alot of compiling of knowledge from ancient civilisations....that's one of it's major achievements. Recording all scientific knowledge out there into one languageso that it can be built on, the alexandria library (i think) is famous for having compiled so many different texts from different civilisations.
Scholars were specifically sent out to do this, and advancements were made.

I'm not saying Islman faccilitates science, but in that period it very much did and it was the most adavanced civilisation during that period. Why get all defensive? Why is modern technology even a factor in this?

Sometimes, people fail to isolate issues here.

Hell, if you want to put it that way, europe has made far more technological advancements since the power of the church was virtually abolished.....

[Limbo]

Why get all defensive?

Hell, if you want to put it that way, europe has made far more technological advancements since the power of the church was virtually abolished.....

I'm not defensive, I just think contributions from Islamic scientists are so trivial as to be scarcely worth mentioning.

Here is a list of the 100 most influential scientists past and present (from The Scientific 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Scientists, Past and Present, Citadel Press (2000), written by John Galbraith Simmons. ). How many Muslims do you see (sorry about the messy format)?

1 Isaac Newton the Newtonian Revolution Anglican (rejected Trinitarianism, i.e., Athanasianism;
believed in the Arianism of the Primitive Church)
2 Albert Einstein Twentieth-Century Science Jewish
3 Neils Bohr the Atom Jewish Lutheran
4 Charles Darwin Evolution Anglican (nominal); Unitarian
5 Louis Pasteur the Germ Theory of Disease Catholic
6 Sigmund Freud Psychology of the Unconscious Jewish; Atheist; Freudian psychoanalysis (Freudianism)
7 Galileo Galilei the New Science Catholic
8 Antoine Laurent Lavoisier the Revolution in Chemistry Catholic
9 Johannes Kepler Motion of the Planets Lutheran
10 Nicolaus Copernicus the Heliocentric Universe Catholic (priest)
11 Michael Faraday the Classical Field Theory Sandemanian
12 James Clerk Maxwell the Electromagnetic Field Presbyterian; Anglican; Baptist
13 Claude Bernard the Founding of Modern Physiology
14 Franz Boas Modern Anthropology Jewish
15 Werner Heisenberg Quantum Theory Lutheran
16 Linus Pauling Twentieth-Century Chemistry Lutheran
17 Rudolf Virchow the Cell Doctrine
18 Erwin Schrodinger Wave Mechanics Catholic
19 Ernest Rutherford the Structure of the Atom
20 Paul Dirac Quantum Electrodynamics
21 Andreas Vesalius the New Anatomy Catholic
22 Tycho Brahe the New Astronomy Lutheran
23 Comte de Buffon l'Histoire Naturelle
24 Ludwig Boltzmann Thermodynamics
25 Max Planck the Quanta Protestant
26 Marie Curie Radioactivity Catholic (lapsed)
27 William Herschel the Discovery of the Heavens Jewish
28 Charles Lyell Modern Geology
29 Pierre Simon de Laplace Newtonian Mechanics atheist
30 Edwin Hubble the Modern Telescope
31 Joseph J. Thomson the Discovery of the Electron
32 Max Born Quantum Mechanics Jewish Lutheran
33 Francis Crick Molecular Biology Episcopalian
34 Enrico Fermi Atomic Physics Catholic
35 Leonard Euler Eighteenth-Century Mathematics Calvinist
36 Justus Liebig Nineteenth-Century Chemistry
37 Arthur Eddington Modern Astronomy Quaker
38 William Harvey Circulation of the Blood Anglican (nominal)
39 Marcello Malpighi Microscopic Anatomy Catholic
40 Christiaan Huygens the Wave Theory of Light Calvinist
41 Carl Gauss (Karl Friedrich Gauss) Mathematical Genius Lutheran
42 Albrecht von Haller Eighteenth-Century Medicine
43 August Kekule Chemical Structure
44 Robert Koch Bacteriology
45 Murray Gell-Mann the Eightfold Way Jewish
46 Emil Fischer Organic Chemistry
47 Dmitri Mendeleev the Periodic Table of Elements
48 Sheldon Glashow the Discovery of Charm Jewish
49 James Watson the Structure of DNA atheist
50 John Bardeen Superconductivity
51 John von Neumann the Modern Computer Jewish Catholic
52 Richard Feynman Quantum Electrodynamics Jewish
53 Alfred Wegener Continental Drift
54 Stephen Hawking Quantum Cosmology atheist
55 Anton van Leeuwenhoek the Simple Microscope Dutch Reformed
56 Max von Laue X-ray Crystallography
57 Gustav Kirchhoff Spectroscopy
58 Hans Bethe the Energy of the Sun Jewish
59 Euclid the Foundations of Mathematics Platonism / Greek philosophy
60 Gregor Mendel the Laws of Inheritance Catholic (Augustinian monk)
61 Heike Kamerlingh Onnes Superconductivity
62 Thomas Hunt Morgan the Chromosomal Theory of Heredity
63 Hermann von Helmholtz the Rise of German Science
64 Paul Ehrlich Chemotherapy Jewish
65 Ernst Mayr Evolutionary Theory atheist
66 Charles Sherrington Neurophysiology
67 Theodosius Dobzhansky the Modern Synthesis Russian Orthodox
68 Max Delbruck the Bacteriophage
69 Jean Baptiste Lamarck the Foundations of Biology
70 William Bayliss Modern Physiology
71 Noam Chomsky Twentieth-Century Linguistics Jewish atheist
72 Frederick Sanger the Genetic Code
73 Lucretius Scientific Thinking Epicurean; atheist
74 John Dalton the Theory of the Atom Quaker
75 Louis Victor de Broglie Wave/Particle Duality
76 Carl Linnaeus the Binomial Nomenclature Christianity
77 Jean Piaget Child Development
78 George Gaylord Simpson the Tempo of Evolution
79 Claude Levi-Strauss Structural Anthropology Jewish
80 Lynn Margulis Symbiosis Theory Jewish
81 Karl Landsteiner the Blood Groups Jewish
82 Konrad Lorenz Ethology
83 Edward O. Wilson Sociobiology
84 Frederick Gowland Hopkins Vitamins
85 Gertrude Belle Elion Pharmacology
86 Hans Selye the Stress Concept
87 J. Robert Oppenheimer the Atomic Era Jewish
88 Edward Teller the Bomb Jewish
89 Willard Libby Radioactive Dating
90 Ernst Haeckel the Biogenetic Principle
91 Jonas Salk Vaccination Jewish
92 Emil Kraepelin Twentieth-Century Psychiatry
93 Trofim Lysenko Soviet Genetics Russian Orthodox; Communist
94 Francis Galton Eugenics
95 Alfred Binet the I.Q. Test
96 Alfred Kinsey Human Sexuality atheist
97 Alexander Fleming Penicillin Catholic
98 B. F. Skinner Behaviorism atheist
99 Wilhelm Wundt the Founding of Psychology atheist
100 Archimedes the Beginning of Science Greek philosophy of Science Greek philosophy

[beelzebub]

What ,did you have that saved to your hard drive? And it's obviously biased as it seems it's a reply to someone claiming islam is a peaceful and knowledgable one, rather than looking at an empire which happened to be islamic however many years ago - see the cellphone bit, covers invasions etc. It's well documented that the islamic empire at that time did alot of compiling of knowledge from ancient civilisations....that's one of it's major achievements. Recording all scientific knowledge out there into one languageso that it can be built on, the alexandria library (i think) is famous for having compiled so many different texts from different civilisations. Scholars were specifically sent out to do this, and advancements were made. I'm not saying Islman faccilitates science, but in that period it very much did and it was the most adavanced civilisation during that period. Why get all defensive? Why is modern technology even a factor in this? Sometimes, people fail to isolate issues here. Hell, if you want to put it that way, europe has made far more technological advancements since the power of the church was virtually abolished.....

I agree Carrot. There is nothing wrong with celebrating everyones contribution to human knowledge. All peopl have helped in creating this and I find it difficult to stomach others that wish to downplay the contribution made.

I listened to a wonderful NPR broadcast on Islams contribution to science and mathmatics. It was wonderful and deeply impactful on our everyday understanding of science.

[Limbo]

Well I guess NASA's new mission is to reach out to Muslims now... and people said George Bush politicized science. Sheesh.

My point is that Islamic societies for the most part have been a barren wasteland when it comes to science and innovation. In my opinion, the religion, generally speaking, holds back the human spirit.

Others may disagree.

[Rec]

What ,did you have that saved to your hard drive? And it's obviously biased as it seems it's a reply to someone claiming islam is a peaceful and knowledgable one, rather than looking at an empire which happened to be islamic however many years ago - see the cellphone bit, covers invasions etc.

It's well documented that the islamic empire at that time did alot of compiling of knowledge from ancient civilisations....that's one of it's major achievements. Recording all scientific knowledge out there into one languageso that it can be built on, the alexandria library (i think) is famous for having compiled so many different texts from different civilisations.
Scholars were specifically sent out to do this, and advancements were made.

I'm not saying Islman faccilitates science, but in that period it very much did and it was the most adavanced civilisation during that period. Why get all defensive? Why is modern technology even a factor in this?

Sometimes, people fail to isolate issues here.

Hell, if you want to put it that way, europe has made far more technological advancements since the power of the church was virtually abolished.....


Another popular but untrue myth. Even during the so-called Dark Ages, the Christian world was always well ahead of the Islamic, most particularly in the realm of technological innovation. In architecture, enginneering, machinery, agronomy and the exploitation of new sources of power, the Middle Ages were marked by periods of invention far more prolonged, creative and diverse than any known to the Hellenistic, Roman and Islamic cultures. We may find it somewhat difficult now to appreciate the revolutionary implications of devices like the heavy saddle with strippups, the wheeled plow, the rigid horse collar, heavy armor, and the nailed horseshoe, but they allowed for cultivation of soils that had never previously been genuinely arable, helped initiate a long period of Western military security, and did much to foster the kind of economic and demographic growth for want of which the Western Roman Empire had fallen into ruin.
It does not take a great imagination, however to grasp the signifincance of medival developments in the use of water, wind and coal to generate power. Waterwheels appeared at the dawn of the High Midldle ages, for instance, first as simple watermills but then, with the ever more sohisticated use of gears, as engines of mechanized industry, most particularly in the Cistercian monasteries of the 12th century and after. In these monasteries, waterpower was used to not only grind and sift grain but also to drive hammers on camshafts for the fulling of wool, to prepare leather for tanning, to run oil presses and wood saws and the bellows of furnaces and so on.

And there are many more acheivements during this so-called period or christian entailment, perhaps there are principallly achievements of "practical science" BUT THEORY RARELY ADVANCES VERY FAR WITHOUT SOME PRACTICAL IMPULSE BEHIND IT. And so, no previous culture has ever boasted technological advances of such scope and variety.....CHRISTIAN CONSTRAINT DURING THE MIDDLE AGES IS A POPULAR UNTRUE MYTH PREPARED SOLEY FOR THE CARICATURE OF CHRISTIANITY, anyone can go back in history to see this if they care too or would rather cling to unfounded literary falseness.

[freakazoid]

I agree Carrot. There is nothing wrong with celebrating everyones contribution to human knowledge. All peopl have helped in creating this and I find it difficult to stomach others that wish to downplay the contribution made.

I listened to a wonderful NPR broadcast on Islams contribution to science and mathmatics. It was wonderful and deeply impactful on our everyday understanding of science.

RE: "There is nothing wrong with celebrating everyones contribution to human knowledge."

Wrong, beelzebub, there is something wrong with doing so...

Muslim Imam: its ok to kill non-muslims...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64r-iWoTsX8&feature=related

Moderate Islam is like moderate Nazism...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPI3KlDs8pA

Honor Killing - Iraqi Girl Stoned...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_ZWTx-QUj4&feature=related


.

[beelzebub]

Well I guess NASA's new mission is to reach out to Muslims now... and people said George Bush politicized science. Sheesh.

My point is that Islamic societies for the most part have been a barren wasteland when it comes to science and innovation. In my opinion, the religion, generally speaking, holds back the human spirit.

Others may disagree.

You may be right Limbo but I say that whatever they contributed its is still a contributio none-the-less. I am not saying muslims are responcible for the foundaton of science I am just saying they have made a contribution and that is a good thing.

[Limbo]

You may be right Limbo but I say that whatever they contributed its is still a contributio none-the-less. I am not saying muslims are responcible for the foundaton of science I am just saying they have made a contribution and that is a good thing.

Well, yeah, if I was a science educator and I had Muslim kids in my class, I would highlight the fact that there have been world class scientists in the Muslim world to try to inspire them. From that perspective I get it.

[Phoenix]

Can we drop the rabid attack on modern-day Islam to remember that the Saracens at that time that the Islamic Empire looked like this:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e1/Abbasids850.png/250px-Abbasids850.png
The roles were actually quite reversed. During the Crusades, it was the Christian crusaders who would mercilessly kill any non-Christian, while the Saracens often times took crusaders as prisoners who were well-fed, given plenty to drink, and generally well-kept. When the Saracen Saladin took over cities, he was known to allow anyone opposed to his rule to leave the city unharmed. Compare that with the Catholic Church at the time, who would probably just slaughter you, or try you in a closed court for heresy and have you burned at the stake.


Of course, that's no excuse for what Muslims are doing now, nor is it an attack on modern-day Christians who tend to be a lot more civil. I'm just saying that this empire was no crime against humanity, the Catholic Church was (and continues to be in some instances). Besides, religion doesn't necessarily play a role in how governments act. It can, and usually does, but it doesn't have to.

In this day and age, you still have moderate Muslims and extreme Christians. It's just that extremism gets more news coverage, and thus you don't hear much about the moderate Muslims.


As far as what the Muslims are doing now, there's kind of a window for revenge....it closed a few hundred years ago.
Neither religion, however, can honestly claim to be a religion of peace.

[Rec]

War and peace is not made by religions, governments, groups etc. They are products of human actions. period.

[Limbo]

Can we drop the rabid attack on modern-day Islam to remember that the Saracens at that time that the Islamic Empire looked like this:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e1/Abbasids850.png/250px-Abbasids850.png
The roles were actually quite reversed. During the Crusades, it was the Christian crusaders who would mercilessly kill any non-Christian, while the Saracens often times took crusaders as prisoners who were well-fed, given plenty to drink, and generally well-kept. When the Saracen Saladin took over cities, he was known to allow anyone opposed to his rule to leave the city unharmed. Compare that with the Catholic Church at the time, who would probably just slaughter you, or try you in a closed court for heresy and have you burned at the stake.


Of course, that's no excuse for what Muslims are doing now, nor is it an attack on modern-day Christians who tend to be a lot more civil. I'm just saying that this empire was no crime against humanity, the Catholic Church was (and continues to be in some instances). Besides, religion doesn't necessarily play a role in how governments act. It can, and usually does, but it doesn't have to.

In this day and age, you still have moderate Muslims and extreme Christians. It's just that extremism gets more news coverage, and thus you don't hear much about the moderate Muslims.


As far as what the Muslims are doing now, there's kind of a window for revenge....it closed a few hundred years ago.
Neither religion, however, can honestly claim to be a religion of peace.

OMG, you make Paisley Speaker look like a great scholar of history. Your shallow, one-sided take on history is a bad joke.

The western (Christian) world has spilled plenty of blood reforming political and religious institutions to get to the point where we are now. The Islamic world is in desperate need of reform. I don't know why this should be controversial even within the political left. I just don't get it. Why do friggen Castro and Chavez just love Ahmadinejad? Baffling except if you realize that politics makes strange bedfellows, and any enemy of America/Capitalism has got to be great in their minds.

Crusades - smrusades. Ancient history no longer relevant.

[Rec]

But, where are we now??? And I most adamantly disagree with the statement that ancient history is no longer relevant, in that, we are all part of our historical situation for good and bad.
And also with the complete intergration with Western and Christian, Chrisitainity is not a cultural "political" way, but a Christian way. There is a huge disemination in the political (secular) system
and the faith. And I could be wrong, but then maybe not?

[Limbo]

But, where are we now??? And I most adamantly disagree with the statement that ancient history is no longer relevant, in that, we are all part of our historical situation for good and bad.
And also with the complete intergration with Western and Christian, Chrisitainity is not a cultural "political" way, but a Christian way. There is a huge disemination in the political (secular) system
and the faith. And I could be wrong, but then maybe not?

I'm not saying history is not worth studying and relfecting on, what I am saying is that what happened a thousand plus years ago can not be used to justify the action of modern day Islamic extremists. It is not relevant in the debate over whether modern day Islam is a threat to non-muslims.

To make my point perhaps a little more clear, let me put it this way:

The debate often goes like this: Islam is a threat to the non-muslim world because many would kill and wage war to spread Islam. Yes but some misguided Christians waged war in the name of their religion 1200 years ago.

I think bringing up the crusades in this context is irrelevant to the assertion that Islam is dangerous because militants who wish to spread Islam through violence are running amok.

Is that a little better?

[Patt]

Just the fact that we don't ride around on horses every day as our main source of transportation should make your point. But alas, some will not see because they just don't want to.

[Phoenix]

I'm not saying history is not worth studying and relfecting on, what I am saying is that what happened a thousand plus years ago can not be used to justify the action of modern day Islamic extremists.
Way ahead of you...

Of course, that's no excuse for what Muslims are doing now
I was simply pointing out that the archaic Islamic empire was not a crime against humanity, as well as reminding the community that even though there are probably millions of Islamic extremeists, not all Muslims are extremist. There are a lot of Muslims today that will not beat their wives (or if they do, they do it with a toothpick lmfao), just as most Christian these days don't burn people who are said to be witches.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm against all three of what I call the 'Three Desert Cancers," but trying to justify that one is better than the other is just bullshit. All three endorse horrific acts; all three are crimes against humanity, however, all three belong in the age they were created.

Looking into some of the content, it would be somewhat accurate to say that Judaism begat Christianity, and Christianity begat Islam.

Point is that a powerful group taking either the Torah, Bible, or Qu'ran at face literal value is going to produce crimes against humanity.

[Rec]

Way ahead of you...

I was simply pointing out that the archaic Islamic empire was not a crime against humanity, as well as reminding the community that even though there are probably millions of Islamic extremeists, not all Muslims are extremist. There are a lot of Muslims today that will not beat their wives (or if they do, they do it with a toothpick lmfao), just as most Christian these days don't burn people who are said to be witches.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm against all three of what I call the 'Three Desert Cancers," but trying to justify that one is better than the other is just bullshit. All three endorse horrific acts; all three are crimes against humanity, however, all three belong in the age they were created.

Looking into some of the content, it would be somewhat accurate to say that Judaism begat Christianity, and Christianity begat Islam.

Point is that a powerful group taking either the Torah, Bible, or Qu'ran at face literal value is going to produce crimes against humanity.


And I am going to counter with the political ideologies which are a system also, such as the Nazis and your Communism are birds of the same feather,
figuring in the human factor, to pervert with a will to power for whatever reason is wrong, therefore the religious systems such as Islam and Christianity
cannot legimately be singled out as the provocatures only of the logical outcome of the human proclivites. And this is not opinion, as history is a witness to this propensity with any of the human factors figured into the picture.

[Limbo]

And I am going to counter with the political ideologies which are a system also, such as the Nazis and your Communism are birds of the same feather,
figuring in the human factor, to pervert with a will to power for whatever reason is wrong, therefore the religious systems such as Islam and Christianity
cannot legimately be singled out as the provocatures only of the logical outcome of the human proclivites. And this is not opinion, as history is a witness to this propensity with any of the human factors figured into the picture.

In regards to Naziism and Communism, they are both ultimately justifications for concentrating power in the hands of a few for some grand purpose, namely creating some kind of "better" society. They are variations of the same theme. The regime picks the winners and the losers.

Phoenix, you tried to camouflage your argument, but it is the same old canard: all religion is evil/bad, and there is no difference between modern day Christianity and Islam. You used revisionist, bogus history to back up your claim. Nothing new here.

[freakazoid]

War and peace is not made by religions, governments, groups etc. They are products of human actions. period.

But, those actions can and often are influenced by religion.

[Rec]

Also by political differences, by bigotry, by racism, truthfully by all justification of all kinds to a human for the acts against another human. And then
there is just killing for bloodlust alone......all the reasons are just to justify the action of people!

[Carrot]

No one, at any point has tried to justyfy religious terrorists.

Look at the first post of this thread. The islamic empire isn't something that is, or that needs to be hidden away. Modern day behaviour is far worse in many regards.

[dorramide7]

Hi , I'm another comment spammer, Now BANNED of course.

[MrJim]

Out of sheer curiosity, why was OP banned?

[LedZap]

Most of the OP's posts were duplicates of previous posts by established members here.Also , the "OP" would attach an ad on the sig line , which I long ago removed.

[beelzebub]

Just the fact that we don't ride around on horses every day as our main source of transportation should make your point. But alas, some will not see because they just don't want to.

How freggin narrow minded, ignorant or just plain stupid ARE YOU? How dare you classify another peoples intelligence according to their means of transport? Have you LOST YOUR PEA BRAIN???

[beelzebub]

Well, yeah, if I was a science educator and I had Muslim kids in my class, I would highlight the fact that there have been world class scientists in the Muslim world to try to inspire them. From that perspective I get it.

You are missing the point.. The Western World is NOT responsible for all the knowledge in the world. Muslim kids or not, we don't teach that because it is just not true....

[Skeltered]

"Forum Main category Crime Against Humanity Islam."
pretty much holds true for all organized religions , imo.
ptooie.(i wouldn't really give them spit.)

[beelzebub]

"Forum Main category Crime Against Humanity Islam."
pretty much holds true for all organized religions , imo.
ptooie.(i wouldn't really give them spit.)

I approve of this post!

[CLTHealthnut]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMTnQ8RFRPc
There is always going to be a fight, but to be above it is path for all.