Poll Results on Comparing Radical Islam with Radical Christianity.
The poll was generated from this discussion. The question was this one: Is Radical Islam More Dangerous Than Radical Christianity? The results are below. What do you make of them, if anything?
Yes! 163 (45%)
No! 24 (6%)
Equally Dangerous! 174 (48%)
Yes! 163 (45%)
No! 24 (6%)
Equally Dangerous! 174 (48%)
8 comments:
The problem is a monotheistic religion will NOT share its world view.
I think it's kind of interesting, but to be fair, I could suggest another poll that might be split more evenly:
Which of the following is more likely to illustrate some kind of truth about human existence?
A. Religion
B. Astrology
C. A blog poll
:)
Least see franith:
Religion = myth.
Astrology = myth.
A blog poll is not even related to the above! It's a POLL that simply looks at the above as seen by others.
I worry about Islam a hell of a lot more than Christianity.
I would definitely say that radical Islam is more dangerous than radical Christianity. Christians who do radical things, such as commit violence, encourage violence against other religions, or fail to give medical treatment to their children are criticized not only by us non-believers, but by a majority of their fellow Christians. Although this may illustrate the extreme inconsistency that plagues Christianity in that the radical Christians are the ones who actually believe and follow the Bible, most Christians only acknowledge the parts of scripture that sound nice, and therefore they see most issues of morality the same way that us non-believers do. I do not believe that Islam has this same inconsistency. While it is true that most Muslims do not commit violence in the name of Islam, it is also true that most Muslims are much more committed to the entirety of their holy text. They do not cherry-pick the way that Christians do.
Further, while the Christian Bible describes a God that is wrathful and violent, the reader of the Bible is not literally encouraged to go out and commit acts of violence towards non-believers. That duty is reserved for Satan when we die and go to hell. The Quran literally tells Muslims that non-Muslims should be killed now.
An incresaing number of people calling themselves "christians" are beginning to mirror the evil represented by radical Islam. Rev Jeremiah Wright, with his now infamous "God Damn America' sermon represents this side well.
Here's an interesting take on the issue.http://revkharma.wordpress.com/2008/04/02/radical-christianity-emerging-emulating-radical-islam/
This is a great question, and an issue that is more complicated than people realize. It's worthwhile to distinguish two different questions.
1-Is the Bible more likely or less likely than the Qur'an to engender violence?
2-Are followers of the Bible more likely or less likely to be violent than followers of the Qur'an?
In my estimation I think the answer to question 1 is that the Bible is more likely to engender violence. If you read the Qur'an it certainly has some violent parts. But violence isn't always wrong. Often violence that is commanded is also accompanied by commands to be merciful in the event your opponents change their ways (see Sura 9). But in the Bible you often have total genocide with no quarter given whatsoever.
To the second question, I say simply look at the history. Who has been more violent through the years? Well, 9-11 was pretty bad. 3000 dead. But the U.S. kills that many without blinking. About that many civilians died in Panama and most Americans don't even know about it. The U.S. encouraged and armed Saddam to kill a million Iranians (and also armed Iran to have them kill 600,000 Iraqi's). Both religions were involved there, so perhaps that one can be attributed to both sides. The U.S. has installed dictators throughout the world that have killed thousands, if not millions. We overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran and installed the Shah and trained his secret police. They killed thousands. We overthrew the democratically elected leader in Chile and installed a dictator that built concentration camps which were used to kill thousands. We imposed sanctions on Iraq in 1990 that starved about a million children, all to oust a dictator (Saddam) that we had installed. We funded the Contras in Nicaraugua that basically went to war against their government. Prior to that we had installed a dictator their that was very brutal. To date at least 100,000 have been killed in our recent conflict with Iraq, which was ostensibly initiated to rid our man Saddam of WMD. Only ardent Bush supporters believe that any more. It was most likely done for more nefarious reasons.
So it's pretty tough to compete with the Christian United states in terms of bloodshed. How can one reasonably conclude that followers of the Bible are less likely to be violent?
Thank you for teaching me about the evils and dangers of my religion. Back when I was an agnostic/freethinker, I used to selfishly amass the six-figure income I made. Now as a Christian living with all this money I made by my own efforts (not by God's efforts... Just ask.... you guys), I realize that it belongs to me, me and ME!!! Please guide me away from spending my money putting African children through school and buying them medicine and AIDS education programs. Please guide me back towards the selfish, self-absorbed womanizer that I used to be. After all, why should I spend my time and efforts on anything but me. I'm going to go out and buy another sports car. Thank you for helping me see the light. Let's hope that I spend my time reading your dissections of Christianity rather than spedning that time helping teach underpriviledged inner-city kids how to read. Selfishness and agnosticism is soooooo much safer when you're rich (like me)!!!! YOU GUYS ROCK!!!
Post a Comment