Why Do You Trust Muhammad?

[IzzyPop]

That is tu quoque

I would be forced to defend Christianity as not being a religion of terror FIRST - before I could address Islam.

That is tu quoque.

No. I am giving you the argument that Islam is based on fear. I agree with you. I am asking why Islam should be blamed for this when nearly every other religion is founded upon the exact same fear?

 

[Montalban]

No. I am giving you the argument that Islam is based on fear. I agree with you. I am asking why Islam should be blamed for this when nearly every other religion is founded upon the exact same fear?

No you are saying my religion is also based on fear - and I would then have to defend my faith - because I don't think it is, in order to meet your criteria - that I can't criticise Islam if my religion is just as bad.

That is a tu quoque

 

[IzzyPop]

No you are saying my religion is also based on fear - and I would then have to defend my faith - because I don't think it is, in order to meet your criteria - that I can't criticise Islam if my religion is just as bad.

That is a tu quoque

I have never said that you cannot critize Islam. I have also stated that I believe your criticism is accurate. These make it impossible for it to be a tu quoque. It is the pot calling the kettle black, from my POV, but that is not a fallacy.

 

[Montalban]

I have never said that you cannot critize Islam. I have also stated that I believe your criticism is accurate. These make it impossible for it to be a tu quoque. It is the pot calling the kettle black, from my POV, but that is not a fallacy.

You have implied that my religion is just as bad, and therefore I'd be hypocritical for criticising Islam. You say so here.

The very fact you think I'm just as bad means that in order to have a valid argument against Islam, I'd have to justify Christianity.

It is a tu quoque argument!

 

[Erfan777]

This is a thread concerning Islamic matters.

It is something that should be able to be discussed on its own merits.

Islam doesn't have to be justified by its comparison to other religions does it?

lol ok. Whatever.

 

[humblemuslim]

well explain this tu quoque argument then, whatever it means. Why would God allow such a thing? If this was done to your own country you would call this act the most evil thing, your children, wife, whole family along with your countrymen getting slaughtered...how would you feel?

I'm not sure if you are asking what a tu quoque is or if you are asking something else, but just in case I thought I'd define what a tu quoque is in case anyone is unclear.

A tu quoque argument is also called a 'You too' Fallacy. It is a special case of the ad hominem argument (Personal Attack).

Basically the argument is structured as follows:

Person A makes claim X
Person B asserts that A's actions/past claims are inconsistent with the truth of claim X.
Therefore X is false.

So actually no one here, in this thread that I have personally noticed, is committing a tu quoque. None of them have challenged the view that 'fear and terror' are part of Islam. They are simply tacking on the view that Christianity follows the same pattern.

If anything you could accuse them of Red Herrings, since the nature of Christianity is not relevant to Islam. And by taking on the topic of Christianity's nature you would be abandoning the original topic. Unless the original topic was to compare Christianity to Islam, which in this case it was not, then any comparison is a Red Herring.

And I will admit even half of my original response was a Red Herring, which is why I purposely divided the post into two parts by a dashed line. I wanted to note some things personally towards the OP, though they are Red Herrings. Heck even the Moses comment is a Red Herring and should have been moved above the line.

The most common fallacy on this forum is the Red Herring. My self included in its use. It is a convenient way convince the opposing side that we share a common view in some cases. Though strictly from an argument POV, it is poor debate tactics. One should be able to address the points directly without making references to the author's views.

After thinking deeply about this issue, I personally am going to attempt to refrain from such tactics in future posts.

 

[IzzyPop]

You have implied that my religion is just as bad, and therefore I'd be hypocritical for criticising Islam. You say so here.

The very fact you think I'm just as bad means that in order to have a valid argument against Islam, I'd have to justify Christianity.

It is a tu quoque argument!

I was mistaken. It is a tu quoque. It is not a fallacy, however. I have stated twice now that your argument is valid. I am not asking for you to defend your religion, I am asking why Islam is singled out as 'the religion based on fear' when they all are based on the exact same fear of death?

 

[Montalban]

lol ok. Whatever.

Obviously not with some, however

 

[Montalban]

I was mistaken. It is a tu quoque. It is not a fallacy, however. I have stated twice now that your argument is valid. I am not asking for you to defend your religion, I am asking why Islam is singled out as 'the religion based on fear' when they all are based on the exact same fear of death?

You are asking that; because you're saying I can't examine Islam (without being labelled a hypocrite) because you've already consigned Christianity into the same basket. Therefore I'd have to argue for Christianity just to be able to fairly argue (by your criteria) against Islam!

I shall say no more on this. You obviously don't wish to discuss Islam by its own merits

 

[peaceful soul]

lol ok. Whatever.

I am not speaking only to you, but I used your post since you used LOL and are responded in a nonchalant manner. It is not really funny at all. You are using a 'you too' argument, which is irrelevant to the topic being discussed. There is no relevance to this topic unless you are simply pointing out a similarity. Even so, you can't use that similarity to justify the topic at hand.

 

[Montalban]

I am not speaking only to you, but I used your post since you used LOL and are responded in a nonchalant manner. It is not really funny at all. You are using a 'you too' argument, which is irrelevant to the topic being discussed. There is no relevance to this topic unless you are simply pointing out a similarity. Even so, you can't use that similarity to justify the topic at hand.

There's some who can only offer attacks on Christianity... even on a thread about Islam!

 

[peaceful soul]

You are asking that; because you're saying I can't examine Islam (without being labelled a hypocrite) because you've already consigned Christianity into the same basket. Therefore I'd have to argue for Christianity just to be able to fairly argue (by your criteria) against Islam!

I shall say no more on this. You obviously don't wish to discuss Islam by its own merits

Exactly! There is no way around this. A tu quoque by definition is a fallacy. If one is just pointing out a similarity, then it is not a tu quoque; rather, it is just a comparison. Why would we need a comparison if the topic is not a comparison?

 

[Montalban]

Exactly! There is no way around this. A tu quoque by definition is a fallacy. If one is just pointing out a similarity, then it is not a tu quoque; rather, it is just a comparison. Why would we need a comparison if the topic is not a comparison?

It's one of the reasons I'm certain Christianity is correct; the irrational attacks on Christianity - and we know who's the source of confusion.

Islam can't stand on its own merits.

 

[humblemuslim]

It's one of the reasons I'm certain Christianity is correct; the irrational attacks on Christianity - and we know who's the source of confusion.

Islam can't stand on its own merits.

I feel the same way about the attacks on Islam...Continually being badgered by the same 'irrational' attacks as though they are facts.

 

[IzzyPop]

You are asking that; because you're saying I can't examine Islam (without being labelled a hypocrite) because you've already consigned Christianity into the same basket. Therefore I'd have to argue for Christianity just to be able to fairly argue (by your criteria) against Islam!

Look at it from my perspective: I'm watching people get angry over who's imaginary friend is the coolest. It doesn't matter if you believe Mohammed or Jesus or Buddha or Vishnu or Zeus because when you die, that is the end. Guess what? That scares people a whole lot. And every religion is built on that fear.

So when you say that one is built on fear when they all are, its like whining about how salty the Atlantic is while you are swimming in the Pacific.

I shall say no more on this. You obviously don't wish to discuss Islam by its own merits

Sure I do. With a Muslim. I don't often debate Christianity with a Hindu.

 

[Montalban]

I feel the same way about the attacks on Islam...Continually being badgered by the same 'irrational' attacks as though they are facts.

If you can see Christians using tu quouqe, you'd have a point.

You obviously miss where Moslems tell me I'm misrpresenting Islam, and then simply confirm what I've said all along - like it's conception of women being inferior

 

[peaceful soul]

I feel the same way about the attacks on Islam...Continually being badgered by the same 'irrational' attacks as though they are facts.

You can feel that way, but that doesn't make it so. Surely, your religion will get attacked in a unfair manner sometimes, but what do you say about the legitimate issues that we raise? What about all of the misinformation that your coreligionist (you included) make about Christianity on a very regular basis? You don't seem to correct them when they do it. Why not start with correcting your own irrationality first?

 

[Montalban]

Look at it from my perspective: I'm watching people get angry over who's imaginary friend is the coolest. It doesn't matter if you believe Mohammed or Jesus or Buddha or Vishnu or Zeus because when you die, that is the end. Guess what? That scares people a whole lot. And every religion is built on that fear.

Factual error: Islam, and Christianity don't say death is the end.

Sure I do.

Just not here

 

[Montalban]

You can feel that way, but that doesn't make it so. Surely, your religion will get attacked in a unfair manner sometimes, but what do you say about the legitimate issues that we raise? What about all of the misinformation that your coreligionist (you included) make about Christianity on a very regular basis? You don't seem to correct them when they do it. Why not start with correcting your own irrationality first?

The amount of times Moslems object to me quoting their texts is amazing. Then they're not objecting to context, but simply 'cause I as a non-Moslem are quoting it

This thread about Muhammed has seen a swather of Moslems and other non-Christians try to turn this into a debate about Christianity

 

[humblemuslim]

If you can see Christians using tu quouqe, you'd have a point.

You obviously miss where Moslems tell me I'm misrpresenting Islam, and then simply confirm what I've said all along - like it's conception of women being inferior

I frequently do. Let us not pretend this is a one way offense. I think we are both aware both sides are at fault from time to time.


What does this have to do with the 'irrational' attacks?

Or have we moved beyond this topic?

In any case, if someone says you are misrepresenting the religion and then turn around and verify what you just said, assuming they actually do that, then that is the textbook definition of a hypocrite.

But there are those of us who disagree that women are inferior. That is something that does need to be acknowledged, regardless of the popularity of that understanding.