aller en fin document suivant

Newsgroups: alt.atheism Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!ira.uka.de!news.dfn.de!tubsibr!dbstu1.rz.tu-bs.de!I3150101 From: I3150101@dbstu1.rz.tu-bs.de (Benedikt Rosenau) Subject: Re: An Anecdote about Islam Message-ID: <16BA7123EF.I3150101@dbstu1.rz.tu-bs.de> Sender: postnntp@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (Mr. Nntp Inews Entry) Organization: Technical University Braunschweig, Germany References: <1pd5nr$89r@s1.gov> <113689@bu.edu> <16BA4AB7F.I3150101@dbstu1.rz.tu-bs.de> <114127@bu.edu> Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 19:45:34 GMT In article <114127@bu.edu> jaeger@buphy.bu.edu (Gregg Jaeger) writes: >>When they are victimized they are Muslims. When they victimize others >>they are not True Muslims (tm) or no Muslims at all. > >>Quite annoying. > >I don't understand the point of this petty sarcasm. It is a basic >principle of Islam that if one is born muslim or one says "I testify >that there is no god but God and Mohammad is a prophet of God" that, >so long as one does not explicitly reject Islam by word then one _must_ >be considered muslim by all muslims. So the phenomenon you're attempting >to make into a general rule or psychology is a direct odds with basic >Islamic principles. If you want to attack Islam you could do better than >than to argue against something that Islam explicitly contradicts. > It was no criticism of Islam for a change, it was a criticism of the arguments used. Namely, whenever people you identify as Muslims are the victims of the attacks of others, they are used an argument for the bad situation of Muslims. But whenever deeds by Muslim that victimize others are named, they do not count as an argument because what these people did was not done as a true Muslims. No mention is made how Muslims are the cause of a bad situation of another party. Double standards. Benedikt
dift1010@iro.umontreal.ca