Subject: Re: OK! Religious Tolerances...
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 11:13:54 +1100
From: Richard Kerr <>
Newsgroups: aus.religion.christian,aus.religion

Aynur Bulut wrote:
> 
> Sam wrote:
> >
> > >If I made up jokes and skits about Muslims I'd be hounded and possibly
> > >sued so howcome Christianity is fair game?

When you've got targets like Fred Nile to take pot-shots at it's very
hard to refuse, though.

What bothers me is that all Christians are tarred with the same brush.

> >
> > Don't worry about being sued. You will probably be killed.
> >
> > (For the ignorant, look up Salman Rushdie and The Satanic Verses)
>
> For the ignorant, look up qur'an, chapter 2, verse 256 :
> 
> "There should be no coercion in the matter of faith"
> 
> ...amongst hundreds of other verses.
> 
> Also note this fatwa against Rushdie was made by the Shia group who are
> a minority of the world Muslim population and are not considered
> orthodox Muslims.

...by the Muslims from the other side of the fence. If you're Shi'ite
the only orthodox Muslims are Shi'ite muslims. It's been that way since
the generation after Muhammad.

> > >I"m not defending christendon by the way just trying to see why there
> > >isn't any level of equity here.
> >
> > Muslims do not turn the other cheek I'm afraid.

The Muslims I know _do_ turn the other cheek. They are very peaceful and
loving people. We should be careful not to fall into the same trap that
JJJ falls into with Christians.

> No, they do not. They believe in defending themselves and others who may
> be persecuted. Look up Ottoman times when the Sultan allowed immigration
> of European jews into Turkey as they were being persecuted by the Church
> (then allowed them to form autonomous communities in which Jewish
> culture flourished).
> 
> "O believers, be you securers of justice, witness for God. Let not
> detestation for a people move you not to be equitable; be
> equitable - that is nearer to God-fearing." (5:8)

What I find difficult about the history of Islam is that Muhammad was a
violent man.

For instance, according to the Muslim historians of the time  when the
Meccans attacked Medina (where Muhammad and the first Muslims were
living) in 625 the local Jews, the Bani Qurayzah, threatened to support
Medina. Only one person, a woman, actually acted on the threat and
attempted to kill a muslim.

After the battle Muhammad captured all the Bani Qurayzah. He dug a huge
pit in the middle of the market place and had all the men of tribe,
about 700, and the woman beheaded and had their bodies thrown into the
pit. He then sold the other women and their children into slavery.

Now it's worth dwelling on this for a bit because it's easier to say
"behead 700 people" than do it. It would have taken the better part of a
day, and the women and children, who were forced to be present, would
have been screaming. As the pit filled with writhing bodies the smell of
drying blood, vomit and faeces would have been revolting. But there was
no justice, and definitely no mercy.

The word we use for this now is "Genocide" and Muhammad pursued it
ruthlessly. Obviously this show of force gratly increased Muhammad's
political influence in the region, and it eventually resulted in his
capture of Mecca.

How do modern Muslims, who are overwhelmingly peace loving people,
reconcile their faith with the violent actions of their prophet?

This is not an attack, it's an honest question...

-- 
Regards,

Richard Kerr            Ph: (02) 9351 5320
SUHRF 2000 Project      Fx: (02) 9351 5323
University of Sydney