The Instigator
left_wing_mormon
Pro (for)
Losing
31 Points
The Contender
Renzzy
Con (against)
Winning
80 Points

Islam is a peaceful religion

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/10/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,796 times Debate No: 4382
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (40)
Votes (26)

 

left_wing_mormon

Pro

I am not a Muslim, but I wish to defend the religion that is smeared in this soceity since 9-11.

First of all, the stereo-types that surround the Muslims is ignorant to say the least. To classify an entire religion based on a crazy group of radicals is absurd. The fundmental teachings of Islam reflect the same moral principles as found in the Torah (the Jewish Holy Book) and the Holy Bible (Christiantys Holy Book).

In the Koran (the Islamic Holy Book), the only permissible war is one of self-defense. Muslims may not begin hostilities (2: 190). Warfare is always evil, but sometimes you have to fight in order to avoid the kind of persecution that Mecca inflicted on the Muslims (2: 191; 2: 217) or to preserve decent values (4: 75; 22: 40). The Koran quotes the Torah, the Jewish scriptures, which permits people to retaliate eye for eye, tooth for tooth, but like the Gospels, the Koran suggests that it is meritorious to forgo revenge in a spirit of charity (5: 45). Hostilities must be brought to an end as quickly as possible and must cease the minute the enemy sues for peace (2: 192-3).

I wish for my opponet to respectfully disagree and not invoke racism in this debate. Thank you.
Renzzy

Con

Thanks for the debate!

First off I would like to say one thing:

THERE IS ONLY ONE RACE!!!

I have no "racial" prejudice. I do believe, however, that Islam is FAR from a peaceful religion.

I will start with posting some pictures. Take a good long look...

(http://images.google.com...)

Allow me to quote some of the signs they are holding up...

"Slay those who insult Islam!"
"Butcher those who mock Islam!"
"Europe, you will pay! Your 9/11 is on it's way!"
"Be prepared for the REAL holocaust!"
"Europe will pay! Demolition is on it's way!"

I would like to know where you read peace into that. You might, however, consider this a small group that should not be considered. One of those groups that should be looked over. I think this would be a mistake. If this is how muslims are acting, this is how I will precieve Islam.

On top of that, peace is not taught throughout the Qu'ran.

Surah 4:95---
"Not equal are those believers who sit and those who strive hard and fight in the cause of Allah with their wealth and lives."

Surah 2:190---
"Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you. And slay them wherever you catch them."

Surah 2:216---
"Fighting is prescribed for you, and you dislike it. But it is possible that you dislike a thing which is good for you, and that you love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knows and you know not."

Hadith 4:73---
"Muhammed said, "Know that paradise is under the shades of the sword."

Please explain where you are reading peace into this. Even if you go back to the Qu'ran, past the gruops that you think we should look over, such as the Jihad, you will not find peace.

I find it rather interesting that the Qu'ran peacefully permits the beating of one's wife.

Surah 4:34---
"Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great."

This is only to be a last resort, after VERBAL abuse. (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com...) Not so peaceful.

Take a look at this one...

"A woman came to Muhammad and begged her to stop her husband from beating her. Her skin was bruised so badly that she it is described as being "greener" than the green veil she was wearing. Muhammad did not admonish her husband, but instead ordered her to return to him and submit to his sexual desires."
(http://www.thereligionofpeace.com...)

"To classify an entire religion based on a crazy group of radicals is absurd."

Not really. Not when the "radicals" are acting in accordance with their holy book. Besides, If this is how the religion portrays itself, why should we believe otherwise?

"The Koran quotes the Torah, the Jewish scriptures, which permits people to retaliate eye for eye, tooth for tooth..."

...But it says that forgiving is BETTER. What? You CAN take revenge, but it BETTER to forgive?

If it permits the taking of revenge, it is not peaceful. I don't care if it encourages forgiveness.

I will start with that.

Thanks!

Renzzy
Debate Round No. 1
left_wing_mormon

Pro

Thanks for accepting the debate.

To address the photo. I bet the little ryhmes my opponet "cited" as being in the picture sound just as catchy in Arabic. And lets not assume this photo represents the Islamic teachings. When a fundementalist christian shoots an abortion doctor, we don't say that represents the entire Christian faith. To assume the men in this picture represent Islam on a whole scale level is very ignorant and intolerant. First of all Islam is split into many different sects, just as Christianty. As Karen Armstrong pointed out in her Time magizne article: "It would be as grave a mistake to see Osama bin Laden as an authentic representative of Islam as to consider James Kopp, the alleged killer of an abortion provider in Buffalo, N.Y., a typical Christian or Baruch Goldstein, who shot 29 worshipers in the Hebron mosque in 1994 and died in the attack, a true martyr of Israel. The vast majority of Muslims, who are horrified by the atrocity of Sept. 11, must reclaim their faith from those who have so violently hijacked it." (http://www.time.com...)

Now I would like to start the next response by saying it is very easy to look at the scriptures my opponent quoted and take them out of the big picture. This is what people like Osama bin Laden do to gain support for their radical causes.

My opponet claims "On top of that, peace is not taught throughout the Qu'ran."

But this is clear contridiction to the what I listed above in my opening argument. Here are some more sciptures about forgivness vs. revenge: Chapter 3, verse 172, of the Koran: "Of those who answered the call of Allah and the messenger, even after being wounded, those who do right and refrain from wrong have a great reward." Now I now my opponet said he/she doesn't care if it preaches forgiveness but I say turning the other cheek is peaceful.

Now many scholars say at the same time the Koran also permits self-defense. But still defending yourself is different than flying a plane into a building.

As Armstrong points out in the article I cited above: "Islam did not impose itself by the sword. In a statement in which the Arabic is extremely emphatic, the Koran insists, "There must be no coercion in matters of faith!" (2: 256). Constantly Muslims are enjoined to respect Jews and Christians, the "People of the Book," who worship the same God (29: 46). In words quoted by Muhammad in one of his last public sermons, God tells all human beings, "O people! We have formed you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another" (49: 13)--not to conquer, convert, subjugate, revile or slaughter but to reach out toward others with intelligence and understanding."

"If people are intent on using religion to motivate terror or violence, they'll find an excuse there no matter what the actual text says," says David Rodier of American University in Washington, D.C., who is an expert on the world's religions. Just like my opponet who will take scriptures out of context in order to fit his/her own cause. But I do not blame my opponet, because this soceity has been taught that this religion is naturally violent. But the teachings clearly say other wise.

Extremists such as Osama bin Laden, or people like my opponet who are not very fimilar with the teachings of Islam, like to quote such verses as "Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you. And slay them wherever you catch them,"
but do so selectively. They do not include the exhortations to peace, which in almost every case follow these more ferocious passages: "Thus, if they let you be, and do not make war on you, and offer you peace, God does not allow you to harm them" (4: 90).

To conclude my post I leave you with a slice of a national geographic article entitled "Koran a Book of Peace, Not War, Scholars Say": "You do not kill innocent people, you do not cheat, you do not lie, you do not destroy any property of other human beings," says Imam Abdullah Khouj, an Islamic scholar and director of the Islamic Center, in Washington, D.C. The attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon "can't be in the name of Allah," he adds.

Most of this debate is not between Renzzy and I, rather a debate between common misconception and faccts and words of Islamic Scholars.

Thank you.
Renzzy

Con

"lets not assume this photo represents the Islamic teachings."

What you are missing is that they do everything thay do in the name of Islam. If you look further into the Qu'ran than you have already, you will find that it teaches that if your enemy is weaker than you, you should conquer him.

S. 47:35---
"So be not weak and ask not for peace (from the enemies of Isl�m), while you are having the upper hand. God is with you, and will never decrease the reward of your good deeds."

It also says:

Surah 2:216---
"Fighting is prescribed for you, and you dislike it. But it is possible that you dislike a thing which is good for you, and that you love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knows and you know not."

"When a fundementalist christian shoots an abortion doctor, we don't say that represents the entire Christian faith."

Of course we don't. Murder is STRICTLY forbidon in the Bible.

"To assume the men in this picture represent Islam on a whole scale level is very ignorant and intolerant."

Excuse me, but these men represent the Jihad. The Jihad is Allah's chosen way of fighting infidels. Look at the verses I have quoted above please, and respond to THEM.

"It would be as grave a mistake to see Osama bin Laden as an authentic representative of Islam as to consider James Kopp, the alleged killer of an abortion provider in Buffalo, N.Y., a typical Christian..."

May I point out the fact that Osama din Laden, whenever he appears on TV is quoting the Qu'ran. A former Muslim, Egun Caner, says " "It is difficult to take the Qur'an out of context,".

If bin Laden is quoting the Qu'ran, he is obviously in accordance with it. In this case he would be doing nothing against the Qu'ran. Does THIS make the Qu'ran sound peaceful?

"Now I now my opponet said he/she doesn't care if it preaches forgiveness but I say turning the other cheek is peaceful."

Your not getting me. Yes, turning the other cheek is peaceful, but the Qu'ran allows revenge as well. THAT is not peaceful.

"But still defending yourself is different than flying a plane into a building."

And flying a plane into a building is not permitted?

Surah 2:190---
"Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you. And slay them wherever you catch them."

America is sending missionaries into Islamic countries. Would this not be seen as fighting Islam? According to the doctrine of Jihad, there are three waves of Jihad. The first wave is shock, the second is to show the people that they are vulnerable, and the third is to humiliate them. They are commanded to do this to all who fight Islam. NOT peaceful. Peace is not taught here.

You have yet to counter my verses.

Please site the what part of the Qu'ran your passages come from. "(4: 90)" means nothing to me.

Thanks!

Renzzy
Debate Round No. 2
left_wing_mormon

Pro

Ok, lets get start again by saying the Koran clearly speaks out against premptive attacks but allows self-defense. The radicals of this religion who pick and choose what they like to motivate others to follow them DO NOT represent Islam. They attack others in cold blood and some how take scriptures out of context to justify it. Now the reason why I brought up the radical Christian shooting an abortion doctor is because this is a great example of someone taking scriptures and personal interprtation to the next level. As you say, and I agree, Osama bin Laden says things and justifys it by saying I'm doing this for Allah! Now when the Christian kills a doctor they say "I'm doing this for Jesus".

How about the many so-called "Christian Terrorist organizations"? Army of God is a group that is anti-abortion and very radical. This gruop lives by the writings of the Bible and carry on with a motto from "Second Defensive Action Statement" which reads: "We declare and affirm that if in fact Paul Hill did kill or wound abortionist John Britton, and accomplices James Barrett and Mrs. Barrett, his actions are morally justified if they were necessary for the purpose of defending innocent human life. Under these conditions, Paul Hill should be acquitted of all charges against him." Other groups similar the Army og God are The Lambs of Christ and The Covenant, The Sword, and the Arm of the Lord. The puropose of writing this is to show that many religions can have groups of people who take things either the wrong way or out of context to promote their agenda in a violent way.

"Of course we don't. Murder is STRICTLY forbidon in the Bible." Yes I know this. But killing in cold blood is also forbidden in the Koran, as I have pointed out.

The "full picture" of Islam and the Koran, say Khouj and Nyang(2 Islamic scholars and Muslims), is captured by Chapter 5, Verse 32: "[I]f anyone slew a person—unless it be for murder or spreading mischief in the land—it would be as if he slew the whole people. And if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people."(http://news.nationalgeographic.com...)

"America is sending missionaries into Islamic countries. Would this not be seen as fighting Islam?" Well it shouldn't because the Koran teaches tolerance for Christian and Jewish Brothers and Sisters. In Sura 29:46 we see that Islam believes that all of the 3 major religions (Jew, Christian, and Muslim) worship the same God. Now just like anyother religion they believe only they will achive paradise, and are intsructed to bring as many people to Allah as they can. Not by force though.

In closing I recommend everyone to open your mind and learn. Go to the source the Koran itself. Ask Muslims and other Islamic professors. From my research on this debate the consensus is clear: Radcial Islam is far from the fundemental teachings of the Koran.

Thanks for the debate.
Renzzy

Con

"Ok, lets get start again by saying the Koran clearly speaks out against premptive attacks but allows self-defense."

Surah 2:190---
"Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you. And slay them wherever you catch them."

This proves otherwise.

"They attack others in cold blood and some how take scriptures out of context to justify it."

I have quoted a former Muslim saying "It is difficult to take the Qur'an out of context". You said nothing about this.

"Now when the Christian kills a doctor they say 'I'm doing this for Jesus'."

I think this whole argument is utterly ridiculous. God cammands peoples to be killed in the Old Testament, but only those who have done something judicially wrong in the New Testament. Allah command people to be slayed througout the Qu'ran. The two are not comparable. ANYONE who says that they are murdering in the name of God is a liar.

"How about the many so-called 'Christian Terrorist organizations'?"

Please, give me the scriptures that they think support their claims and I will more than happily refute them. There are none. I have showed you passages from the Qu'ran that support radical Jihadists (I am not quit sure that "Jihadists" is a word, but you know what I mean :D)

"The 'full picture' of Islam..."

If you actually look into the "Full picture" you will see that it is filled with blatent contradictions. You cant really accept it as a whole. The religion is fatally flawed, in my humble opinion.

" Well it shouldn't because the Koran teaches tolerance for Christian and Jewish Brothers and Sisters."

The Qu'ran teaches that all who fight Islam should be slain. Christians fight Islam. Jews fight Islam. Are you saying that this justifies slaughter? Not very peaceful.

That should conclude.

Thanks for the debate!

Renzzy
Debate Round No. 3
40 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by InsertNameHere 7 years ago
InsertNameHere
vote-bomb, literally. :P lol
Posted by Koopin 7 years ago
Koopin
Don't Vote BOMB!!!!!!!

Okay, okay, i'll stop.
Posted by Koopin 7 years ago
Koopin
Ha ha ha.
Posted by InsertNameHere 7 years ago
InsertNameHere
Grrr... >=(

That wasn't funny!
Posted by Koopin 7 years ago
Koopin
AHH, A TERRORIST JUST POSTED BELOW ME!!!!!!!!
joking...
Posted by InsertNameHere 7 years ago
InsertNameHere
Good to know not everybody slanders islam and views it in a negative light. :)
Posted by Metz 7 years ago
Metz
Renzzy quotes alot of the Koran but somehow misses the part about being peaceful and brotherly
Posted by Agnostic 7 years ago
Agnostic
It's funny that Renzzy is leading by so much when he uses such poor logic. The fact that certain "Muslims" commit awful acts thinking they are in the name of Islam is irrelevant. The Crusades were done in the name of Christianity. The Ku Klux Klan is a Christian organization. The Army of God is a Christian organization. It's a cop-out. Rather than actually find basis for their attacks in the religion, conservatives will often just point to the fact that terrorist acts are committed supposedly in the name of Allah or Islam. Islam preaches self-defense. If you take passages into context, it does not preach violence toward the non-violent. I'm a Christian, but I will continue to fight for Muslims when they are unjustly attacked. It's just ridiculous.

B/A: Pro
Conduct: Pro
Spelling and Grammar: Con
Arguments: Pro
Sources: Pro. Con's sources do not accurately attack Islam. Rather, they attack someone's view of Islam. Attacking straw man arguments is frowned upon.
Posted by Im_always_right 8 years ago
Im_always_right
LOL, good luck finding someone illing to admit that they made an error.
Posted by Renzzy 8 years ago
Renzzy
PFG,

Thank you, much appreciated :)

Mangani,

Silence on an issue is NOT agreement with it. A five-year-old can figure this out, and would assume that you are BY FAR smart enough to do so as well. I am a Christian, and I have not yet on thius site spoken out against Satanism. Does that mean I support it? Absolutly NOT.

Please, cool down, admit your error, and just move on. It would make everything a lot easier.
26 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by InsertNameHere 7 years ago
InsertNameHere
left_wing_mormonRenzzyTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Agnostic 7 years ago
Agnostic
left_wing_mormonRenzzyTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:61 
Vote Placed by hauki20 8 years ago
hauki20
left_wing_mormonRenzzyTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by charles15 8 years ago
charles15
left_wing_mormonRenzzyTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Supernova 8 years ago
Supernova
left_wing_mormonRenzzyTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Jim92 8 years ago
Jim92
left_wing_mormonRenzzyTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by KeithKroeger91 8 years ago
KeithKroeger91
left_wing_mormonRenzzyTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by Renzzy 8 years ago
Renzzy
left_wing_mormonRenzzyTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by cmrnprk07 8 years ago
cmrnprk07
left_wing_mormonRenzzyTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by magpie 8 years ago
magpie
left_wing_mormonRenzzyTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05