The Instigator
tajshar2k
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points
The Contender
Ariesx
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Islam is a religion of peace

Do you like this debate?NoYes+9
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
tajshar2k
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 5/22/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 15,852 times Debate No: 75667
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (81)
Votes (2)

 

tajshar2k

Con

I will be arguing that Islam is "not" a religion of peace.


My opponent will need to prove that it indeed is.
Ariesx

Pro

I accept and will be using verses from the Quran and its people to prove that Islam is indeed a religion of peace.
Debate Round No. 1
tajshar2k

Con

I thank my opponent for this debate.



First I shall start of with definitions



Islam- the religious faith of Muslims, based on the words and religious system founded by the prophet Muhammad and taught by the Koran, the basic principle of which is absolute submission to a unique and personal god, Allah.


Religion- a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects:


Peace- a state of mutual harmony between people or groups, especially in personal relations

Why Islam is not a religion of peace.




Argument 1: Violent Verses in the Quran




4:34 Husbands should take full care of their wives, with [the bounties] God has given to some more than others and with what they spend out of their own money. Righteous wives are devout and guard what God would have them guard in the husbands’ absence. If you fear high-handedness from your wives, remind them [of the teaching of God], then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them. If they obey you, you have no right to act against them




This verse is bascially promoting inequality among genders. It says that husbands should beat their wives, if they fear they might become arrogant.




5:33 Indeed, the punishment of those who fight Allah and His Messenger and who go around corrupting the land is to be killed, crucified, have their hands and feet cut off on opposite sides, or to be banished from the land. That is a disgrace for them in this life, and in the life to come theirs will be a terrible punishment.


This verse is tells us that those who "corrupt the land" should be subject to having their feet and hands cut off, and crucification. Keep in mind, that ISIS is doing exactly this, and both moderate and extremist muslims read the same book.




So to finish this argument off, Islam cannot be considered the religon of peace, when it promotes hate, violence and unequality.

I would like Pro to refute these claims, and I will present my other arguments in the next round.
Ariesx

Pro

Before starting this debate I would like to thank my opponent for starting this debate, and I hope to clarify any misinformation of the Quran. You should know that I am an atheist, and have no problem being corrected or have any given bias towards Islam.
Verses = 6,236
Chapters = 114
Books = 30
My opponent has only listed two paragraphs out of 6,236 verses. These verses are very small, but they all teach very peaceful things. Now the resolution said Is Islam a Religion of peace? Well, I would say that the most accurate versions of Islam was probably practiced during the Prophet's time. First let's start with the 5 pillars of Islam(Duties that Muslims perform each year)
1.First Muslims must first submit testimony to become a Muslim.
2. You have to say your 5 time prayers
3.You gave to give Zakat(Charity) to the needy
4. You have to fast during the month of Ramadan
5. You have to go to Mecca
These 5 rules seem like simple ordinary rules to a faith. Nothing said here was violent.

But, now in order to understand Islam we must first understand how this creed was created. It was created in the 8th century when apparently the prophet started to hear the voice of Gabriel and apparently created the Quran. Whether you believe this story is not the point, but the point of this debate is to define what the Quran taught. To understand the Quran, first we must understand the founder Mohammed. Muhammad was said to be a merchant that worked for a business owned by a 40 year old women Khadija. When Muhammad was 25, Khadija came and begged for marriage. She said that Muhammad was the only sincere individual in her business and begged for marriage. Muhammad accepted. When Muhammad was in his 40s, Mecca was in the stage of Aggressive Capitalism. Capitalism was everywhere. All people in Mecca wanted profit. The youngers seemed to be very awkward around the aggressive capitalism that surrounded them. They came to Muhammad for advice usually. A lot of young people trusted Muhammad. All were convinced of his honesty. Perhaps all of this seems to be bias information about a leader. Even I myself would not trust this information. But, what has led me to trust in this information are the verses of the Quran, and the people willing to follow him. The young were so influenced by Muhammad. When Muhammad started hearing Gabriel, he started telling his family. His wife Khadija believed every single word that came from him, and advocated that he start preaching it. The young that would used to come for advice would believe every single word. There was an incident in where Muhammad was trying to take the young to the rich businesses and start demanding charity would be given to the poor. Capitalism was controlling every part of the rich. The rich said no. Muhammad said the famous line("When the rich disobey the natural law of Allah(not giving charity,) there civilization will fall, for the oppressed will revolt) Muhammad lead a sort of revolution, and than died after it. The people of Islam gathered and started plotting on how they can spread their religion. Source: Book(Muhammad: A prophet of the time) This book was also written by a Christian to assure you no bias.

Now , that we have covered the founder, now we must cover the Quran. Let's start with this quote from the Quran("whoever kills a person it is as if he had killed mankind ( or humanity) entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind ( or humanity) entirely.")
Verses
"Whoever kills a person who has a truce with the Muslims will never smell the fragrance of Paradise."

"Beware! Whoever is cruel and hard on a non-Muslim minority, or curtails their rights, or burdens them with more than they can bear, or takes anything from them against their free will; I (Prophet Muhammad) will complain against the person on the Day of Judgment."

"Anyone who kills a Non-Muslim who had become our ally will not smell the fragrance of Paradise"

"Humanity is but a single Brotherhood, so do not break the brethren".

In Islam, People say this phrase during there 5 time prayers. "But turn away from them, and say peace, for they shall soon know". If ISIS is true to its religion it is obligated to say this phrase. So it is fair to assume that they are hypocritical 5 times per day.

4:34 Husbands should take full care of their wives, with [the bounties] God has given to some more than others and with what they spend out of their own money. Righteous wives are devout and guard what God would have them guard in the husbands" absence. If you fear high-handedness from your wives, remind them [of the teaching of God], then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them. If they obey you, you have no right to act against them.
My opponent has listed this quote to project a false image of Islam. Let's first take a historical lesson. WOMEN were always mistreated by men. It didn't matter whether you were a Christian, Muslim, Jew, Life was hell for women. You may also know that Islam was made during the Dark Ages in where science was apprised and women were mistreated. They would commonly call women witches. My opponent brings out this quote. First of all his attack was this promotes inequality when he forgot also another quote("All who are Muslim are equal in the eyes of Allah") So, think of Islam as one big family. A family who gives duties to each gender. The men traditionally will be the breadwinner while the female will traditionally stay at home. Women actually lived probably better lives in Islam than in Christianity because Women were literally burned for being a witch. This is not what happened in Islam. In Islam, women would have a duty. If disobeyed beaten. Barbaric isn't it. But, the women does have a choice to say I am not following this religion. Bye. If someone tries to kill her than "Anyone who kills a Non-Muslim who had become our ally will not smell the fragrance of Paradise". He is not following Islam. Therefore Islam can still keep it's peace title, but the people can't.

5:33 Indeed, the punishment of those who fight Allah and His Messenger and who go around corrupting the land is to be killed, crucified, have their hands and feet cut off on opposite sides, or to be banished from the land. That is a disgrace for them in this life, and in the life to come theirs will be a terrible punishment.
who fight Allah and His "Messenger" Messenger = Prophet Muhammad or anyone who delivers a holy message. Islam is traditionally eye for an eye; tooth for a tooth. If you hit or kill the prophet the same will be done to you. Hands and feet cut also happened during those days.
Debate Round No. 2
tajshar2k

Con

Since, it is pretty obivious none of us are writing wrong verses, I won't be picky about sources it. However, if you make an extrodinary claim, I ask you to provide sources. I shall do the same thing also.


I will start off with rebutalls


Firstly, my opponent says that I only listed two paragraphs out of 6,236 verses. At the end of this round, I will list a few more




For him presenting information on Mohammed, I hate to say this (he wrote a alot) but none of this is really relavant to the resolution. I'll try to adress the parts that Muhammad says about Religion.

My opponent says that in the Quran, it says "Beware! Whoever is cruel and hard on a non-Muslim minority, or curtails their rights, or burdens them with more than they can bear, or takes anything from them against their free will; I (Prophet Muhammad) will complain against the person on the Day of Judgment." I looked this up, and it is true. However, in the Quran, it also says this. "Muhammad is Allah's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another. Through them, Allah seeks to enrage the unbelievers. - 48:29" Bascially, both of these verses are contridicting each other. So If Islam was a religion of peace, there would be no reason for such verse to exist in the first place. Also I'd like to provide some statistics

One third of Palestinians (32%) supported the slaughter of a Jewish family, including the children.
http://www.ynetnews.com...

31% of Turks support support suicide attacks against Westerners in Iraq.
35% of young Muslims in Britain believe suicide bombings are justified (24% overall).
42% of young Muslims in France believe suicide bombings are justified (35% overall).
22% of young Muslims in Germany believe suicide bombings are justified.(13% overall).
29% of young Muslims in Spain believe suicide bombings are justified.(25% overall).

http://pewresearch.org...


So, If Islam was a religion of peace, such alarming % of people wouldn't be there. Obviously, you can't expect 100% to be peaceful, and I'm not a fool to think that, but surely if it were peaceful, these statistics wouldn't exist. You also mention that the women have a choice to say I am not following this religion. Well technically yes, but when you have verses like Qur'an (4:89) - "They wish that you should disbelieve as they disbelieve, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them, until they emigrate in the way of God; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper." It cannot be considered a viable option for anybody.





My opponent also says that such acts like "tooth for a tooth" were acceptable back in the day, however that isn't the point. Regardless of what traditions and values were back then, you can't regard it as peaceful, because the definition for peaceful has always been the same. My opponent is right, that other religions such as Christianity also had violent verses, however I'm not defending Christianity as a religion of peace.



Ariesx

Pro

Thank you to my opponent for responding. Now, I will start my defense.

My opponent first attacks the verse "Beware! Whoever is cruel and hard on a non-Muslim minority, or curtails their rights, or burdens them with more than they can bear, or takes anything from them against their free will; I (Prophet Muhammad) will complain against the person on the Day of Judgment." He presents the verse "Muhammad is Allah's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another. Through them, Allah seeks to enrage the unbelievers." I looked this up, and indeed it is true. But, he only lists 1 verse.
Here are verses that would outweigh this passage
"Humanity is but a single Brotherhood, so do not break the brethren".
"Whoever kills a person who has a truce with the Muslims will never smell the fragrance of Paradise."
In Islam, People say this phrase during there 5 time prayers. "But turn away from them, and say peace, for they shall soon know". If ISIS is true to its religion it is obligated to say this phrase. So it is fair to assume that they are hypocritical 5 times per day.
I outweigh this verse, because there are a lot of other verses that speak of peace. It is common sense that if there are more verses of peace, than those verses would outweigh one violent verse.

My opponent also provides these statistics:
31% of Turks support support suicide attacks against Westerners in Iraq.
35% of young Muslims in Britain believe suicide bombings are justified (24% overall).
42% of young Muslims in France believe suicide bombings are justified (35% overall).
22% of young Muslims in Germany believe suicide bombings are justified.(13% overall).
29% of young Muslims in Spain believe suicide bombings are justified.(25% overall).
= 69% of Turks do not support suicide attacks against Westerners in Iraq
=65% of young Muslims in Britain do not believe suicide bombings are justified
=42% of young Muslims in France do not believe suicide bombings are justified
=78% of young Muslims in Germany do not believe suicide bombings are justified
= 71% of young Muslims in Spain do not believe suicide bombings are justified

Majority Rules. Vote Con if you follow judging groups by a minority when clearly majority of the Muslims that live in these countries do not believe in these things Con portrays them to.

Qur'an (4:89) - "They wish that you should disbelieve as they disbelieve, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them, until they emigrate in the way of God; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper."
=
("whoever kills a person it is as if he had killed mankind ( or humanity) entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind ( or humanity) entirely.")
Verses
"Whoever kills a person who has a truce with the Muslims will never smell the fragrance of Paradise."

"Beware! Whoever is cruel and hard on a non-Muslim minority, or curtails their rights, or burdens them with more than they can bear, or takes anything from them against their free will; I (Prophet Muhammad) will complain against the person on the Day of Judgment."

"Anyone who kills a Non-Muslim who had become our ally will not smell the fragrance of Paradise"

"Humanity is but a single Brotherhood, so do not break the brethren".

"But turn away from them, and say peace, for they shall soon know". If ISIS is true to its religion it is obligated to say this phrase. So it is fair to assume that they are hypocritical 5 times per day.
My opponent has not bothered to attack these verses, but try to strenthen his argument by using minorities as the picture for the face of Islam. He has dropped all of these arguments, and dismissed the majority of the Muslim community. Vote for the majority, not the minority.

Debate Round No. 3
81 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by JoseKNT 1 year ago
JoseKNT
If we are talking about which religion estates the violence and bloodshed in its "sacred book", it would be the christianism, it clearly states to even let your daughters to get raped, to kill child for sacrifices, you are talking about violence because the EXTREMIST present in some muslim people, generalizating. I know muslim people, and I can assure you, it is not a religion of hatred. That's being ignorant and a generalizer. Those books, bilble, Qur'an, doesn't mean the true meaning of the religion, they are like 2500 years old. Religion doesn't make you a good, neither bad person. All depends of you.
Posted by Preston 1 year ago
Preston
@Grenadier1865 also, saying that they were just doing what they believed in to justify the crusades is weak, thats saying that islamic extremists don't believe in their cause.
Posted by Preston 1 year ago
Preston
@Grenadier1865 The bible tells you to smash babies heads against rocks Psalm 137:9. Abraham is told to kill his son, violence surrounds it, however the Qur'an stresses that righteousness is not in precise observance of the rituals but in acts of compassion and kindness. Al Quran 2:178. It also states Indeed, Allah enjoins justice, and the doing of good to others; and giving like kindred; and forbids indecency, and manifest evil, and wrongful transgression. He admonished you that you may take heed. (Al Quran 16:91). They have the same 10 commandments, the only place it calls for violence is verses written during war and there is nothing that actually says go kill people. "This is the same thing Muslims do, but Christians learned their lesson after a few millennium, and stopped trying to force their religion on others through acts of military, or civilian aggression." This simply isnt true, there are still christian ethnic cleansings, however we, a prodominantly christian country will not focus on it because it would cause an uproar, EX: http://www.reuters.com... and http://www.cnn.com... First world countries may feel that they are underdeveloped and thus judge their faith, but i garuntee first world muslims are judging christians commiting ethnic cleansing all the time, I mean Executive Order 44 from The US is an example of a christan faith forcing another faith to die or leave. Islam in root is a peaceful religion, just as any other faith, however when abused it, just as any other faith, it can become violent. EX(Christian Crusades, Ethnic Cleansing, Japanese Invasion and massacre of China, Executive order 44)
Posted by debate_power 1 year ago
debate_power
Isn't the whole "religion of peace" deal rather vague? Different people can have different ideas of what is "peaceful" or what is "violent".
Posted by Grenadier1865 1 year ago
Grenadier1865
The Koran demands that devout Muslims engage in Jihad, which means Holy War. What part of war is peaceful? Regarding the point that Christianity influenced Islam, that is not true. The Arab and Middle Eastern people all throughout history, even before Christianity and Islam, have been violent, and prone to acts of conquest murdering entire groups of people as they went. Christians often get the short end of the stick for what they did during the Crusades. Number one, they got whipped on every single one, and they were only defending what they believed in. This is the same thing Muslims do, but Christians learned their lesson after a few millennium, and stopped trying to force their religion on others through acts of military, or civilian aggression.
Posted by Preston 1 year ago
Preston
Islam did not lead crusades against itself, those were the christians. They didn't enslave hundreds of thousands and lead political crusades until it met christianity. Until christian countries imposed themselves on muslim countries. 9/11 happened because we provided the area with the means years before to stop russian progression, and what is our most predominant faith, christianity, and what was russia's before the Soviet union? oh its christianity. Just because we consider ourselves progressed and we look at violence as unnecessary doesn't mean thats the worlds views, we need to remember we needed time to develop and so do they.
Posted by tajshar2k 1 year ago
tajshar2k
No, Islam isn't a religion of peace. Its not the extremists fault, because the Qur'an contradicts itself many times. It's unfortunate that peaceful Muslims get a a lot of hate for something they didn't do, but they need to realize people are justified in saying there religion isn't peaceful, because you can't say welcome the guy, then a couple pages later, say kill them.
Posted by Mark81 1 year ago
Mark81
Islam is a religion of peace by itself. It are extremist who misuse the islam for their own.
Posted by Peachman2000 1 year ago
Peachman2000
There is no such thing as a "religion of peace". All religions are used as a method of control over the masses. We will not truly be free until all Organized Religion is done away with.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by TheHitchslap 1 year ago
TheHitchslap
tajshar2kAriesx
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: Con uses sources, con also points out that several verses are contradicting and thus not peaceful. If it were, those verses need not be in there. Also, I didn't like Pro's point on women. Sucks that con didn't nail him on it, but several African societies gave far more rights to women, and Islam compared to them is far more regressive. Pro also kinda contradicts himself and misses it, if Muhammad lead a revolution with poor people, how is that exactly not violent? Both pro and con failed to point out that apostasy is given death sentences. Overall, weak debate by both. But I have to give my vote to con.
Vote Placed by Chaosism 1 year ago
Chaosism
tajshar2kAriesx
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: Pro provides verses that indicate peacefulness, but in order to affirm the resolution, Con's arguments must be refuted, as the BoP rests on Pro (affirmative stance). Con presents a few verses and some statistics (bottom line) that provide evidence that negates the resolution. Pro provides a very few verses that opposed those presented by Con and argues that Con's verses only reflect a tiny portion of the Quran. This argument is equally applicable to Pro, as well. Pro attempts to counter the statistical arguments by inverting Con's statistics, but this is not necessarily accurate because it relies on an assumption that 100% of participants necessarily answered definitively pro or con, so further citation is needed. Either way, in order for Islam to be a "religion of peace", it must not advocate violence. Con's verses and statistics are not refuted, thus negating the resolution.