Holy War

[elman]

Tut tut, do you want to be friends or enemies with us?

Do I have a choice if I do not convert to Islam?

 

[MikeMcK]

Tut tut, do you want to be friends or enemies with us?

Is it possible to be friends with people who want to kill you?

 

[français]

Imagine the following situation: There's a country out there where people of your religion are being oppressed because of their religion, by the law of the land. Its practice is banned, along with missionary activity. People of your religion are forced to convert to the state creed (be it another religion, or some secular state ideology) by threat of execution. For purposes of this thread, atheism is considered to be a religion.

Given these circumstances, would it be morally acceptable, commendable or even a moral duty to invade the country and end the persecution?

that happens in egypt all the time. oh, and saudi arabia.. oh wait, i forgot.. christians can't even worship in saudi arabia.

it's happened in afghanistan before, and in iran.

does that give america the right to wage war on all these countries? NO.

janisarry - you seem to justify islamic terrorism. i remember once you said that killing non muslims is sometimes justified, which is the most disgusting thing i have EVER heard. you always say how opressed muslims are in europe, and this and that. yet why don't you ever comment on chrsitians being persecuted? because be rest assured that it's much harder for a christian to live in egypt then it is for a muslim in denmark. yet you always try and jusitfy islamic terrorism, yet any time the pope says ONE thing, you get all supportive of the islamic extremists who killed nuns in libya, and this and that.

if someone is being opressed, they need to get out. if muslims honestly believe they are being opressed in europe simply because now they can't beat their wives, they can't kill homosexuals, and they can't cover their heads.. then leave europe!! no one wants them there anyways, obviously!!


i think that all muslims should the move to islamic lands, and let us others live in peace. because janissary, i am just.. disgusted at the things you say. like you constantly say how bad homosexuals are.. and you live in finland!! clearly, islam has done this to you. so why don't you move to a muslim country? that way you can practice your beliefs more freely, and not be supposingly "persecuted."

 

[crazyfingers]

First of all, stay on topic. Second, get your facts straight. There is not a single Islamic country in the world at present date where the state forcibly converts resident Christians to Islam. There are a few which prohibit apostasy from Islam. The bulk of all the persecution of Christians found in Islamic countries is done by private initiative, not carried out by the state or any Islamic clergy.

Saudi Arabia forbids missionary work by any religion other than Islam. Officially all religions other than Sunni Islam are banned and churches are not allowed. Unofficially the government acknowledges that many of the foreign workers are Christian and on Aramco civilian compounds, foreign Christians are generally allowed to worship in private homes or even hold services at local schools provided that it is not spoken of in public. This is a degree of unofficial tolerance that is not given to Judaism, or atheism.

In theory, the government can search the home of anyone and arrest or deport foreign workers for owning religious icons and symbols, e.g. a Bible, or rosary. Yet, this generally does not occur on the Aramco compounds and the most common policy for foreign Christians is similar to the United States Armed Forces policy for homosexuals (Don't Ask, Don't Tell). The government tolerates the presence of Christian workers as long as they do not publicly espouse or express their religion. Christian religious services are generally permitted to occur on Aramco compounds, but public displays of non-Islamic religions symbols, even Christmas decorations, can get foreign workers into legal trouble.

"Freedom of religion does not exist," the U.S. State Department's 1997 Human Rights Report on Saudi Arabia states. "Islam is the official religion, and all citizens must be Muslims. The government prohibits the public practice of other religions."

However, at the U.N. Third Millennium Summit in New York City, Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz defended Saudi Arabia's position on human rights, saying "It is absurd to impose on an individual or a society rights that are alien to its beliefs or principles."

Foreigners must conform to local practices in public. Conservative dress is expected, especially for women who travel to rural areas. Shops and restaurants close five times a day for prayer, and public displays of foreign religious or political symbols are not tolerated. During Ramadan eating, drinking, or smoking in public during daylight hours is prohibited. [6] Foreign schools are often required to teach a yearly introductory segment on Islam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia

I guess that if my company ever wanted me to visit Saudi Arabia I should decline.

 

[français]

@MikeMcK:

How about actually answering the question? And no, the article is wrong. Saudi Arabia doesn't prohibit conversions to Christianity. Saudi Arabia prohibits conversions away from Islam. But as for Christian (or other infidel) guest workers living there, nobody forces them to embrace Islam.

so now christians are infidels?? my goodness, i UGH... you just.... crawl through my skin.

First of all, stay on topic. Second, get your facts straight. There is not a single Islamic country in the world at present date where the state forcibly converts resident Christians to Islam. There are a few which prohibit apostasy from Islam. The bulk of all the persecution of Christians found in Islamic countries is done by private initiative, not carried out by the state or any Islamic clergy.

there's not a single christian country that forces a muslim to convert to christianity either, now is there??

Muslim missionaries can at least COME to america and europe. christian missionaries aren't allowed to enter saudi arabia. jews can be legally killed in qatar, a supposingly "liberal" muslim nation.. makes you wonder.

christians are persecuted MUCH MUCH MUCH more in muslim lands then muslims are in christian lands. i have an arab christian friend from bethleham whose brother was DRAGGED TO DEATH IN PUBLIC for simply being christian.. and NO ONE got the people who did it in trouble. people stood outside and WATCHED.

i find it sooo funny that you think it's ok for muslims to wage war on european nations and america who supposingly "opresses" muslims, yet if america EVER waged war on egypt for persecuting christians (which they do all the time) i bet you a billion dollars you wouldn't support that. what a double standard....

 

[non-religious]

[kjf512]

if someone is being opressed, they need to get out. if muslims honestly believe they are being opressed in europe simply because now they can't beat their wives, they can't kill homosexuals, and they can't cover their heads.. then leave europe!! no one wants them there anyways, obviously!!
i think that all muslims should the move to islamic lands, and let us others live in peace.

Talk about crude, simplistic and crass stereotypes and generalisations....

What utter ignorance....

Go get yourself an education......

And you're an extreme Liberal?

 

[Futuwwa]

kjf, concerning post #63, I don't even know where to begin. You do have some strange ideas of what I believe in.

 

[Futuwwa]

Do I have a choice if I do not convert to Islam?

Yes.

 

[ExistencePrecedesEssence]

Imagine the following situation: There's a country out there where people of your religion are being oppressed because of their religion, by the law of the land. Its practice is banned, along with missionary activity. People of your religion are forced to convert to the state creed (be it another religion, or some secular state ideology) by threat of execution. For purposes of this thread, atheism is considered to be a religion.

Given these circumstances, would it be morally acceptable, commendable or even a moral duty to invade the country and end the persecution?

No, why didnt the christian states aid the fall of constantinople? Why did they not send aid to the greatest christian refuge of the east when it was being decended upon by the horde of the Sultan. Those few who were survivors of the fall of constantinople(and of Byzantium) were forced to convert to islam. The Janissaries that you took your name from were the elite of the Turkish Sultan...all of them were christian boys were kidnapped and brainwashed to serve. Why did christian states do nothing?

Why did the forces of Saladin not go to antioch to save the condemned prisoners of its gaurd?

Didnt the french government invade toledo during the spanish inquisition? Which is what The Pit and the Pendulum are based off of?

 

[elman]

Yes.

Glad to hear it.

 

[JohnLocke]

Imagine the following situation: There's a country out there where people of your religion are being oppressed because of their religion, by the law of the land. Its practice is banned, along with missionary activity. People of your religion are forced to convert to the state creed (be it another religion, or some secular state ideology) by threat of execution. For purposes of this thread, atheism is considered to be a religion.

Given these circumstances, would it be morally acceptable, commendable or even a moral duty to invade the country and end the persecution?

Janissary,

Your hypothetical leaves out too many major important details:
1. are the people being oppressed given the opportunity to locate to more hospital countries freely without threat of violence or ruinous cost?
2. what is the level of oppression?
3. do the oppressed people want to be liberated? would the particularly object to liberation by you?


In general I have to say, unfortunately, that I am not a person of principle when it comes to international politics. I decry human rights abuses everywhere, but I don't conscience the use of extreme military force to "convince" sovereign nations of the "errors of their ways." So to answer your question, "No." Despite the pull on the heart strings such oppression of a co-religious group may have, I cannot morally, legally, or ethically justify the use of armed invasion as a means of alleviating that oppression.

Cheers