This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Muslim peace conference condemns terrorism

Muslim peace conference condemns terrorism - Comments

Galactor's Avatar Comment 1 by Galactor

We reject every act of extremism and terrorism unconditionally."

It would have been pertinent to have said that ten years ago.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 20:13:11 UTC | #874802

Sample's Avatar Comment 2 by Sample

Reputation management is worlds apart from objective introspection.

Mike

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 20:20:28 UTC | #874804

Stevehill's Avatar Comment 3 by Stevehill

12,000 British Muslims went out of their way, possibly in some cases at some personal risk, to put two fingers up to terrorism.

I applaud that. We'd have to be crazy to condemn it.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 20:25:34 UTC | #874806

Am I Evil?'s Avatar Comment 4 by Am I Evil?

Maybe a step in the right direction...? Although I'd feel a bit better if he also denounced the nutters who go mad at the slightest criticism of Mohammed / the Quran etc.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 20:42:54 UTC | #874814

Disco Dan's Avatar Comment 5 by Disco Dan

Too little too late.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 20:59:59 UTC | #874818

Neodarwinian's Avatar Comment 6 by Neodarwinian

" Islam has nothing to do with any acts of terrorism. "

Perhaps, but Catholicism has nothing to do with pedophilia either.

A step in the right direction, but Islam does have something to do with things that are less than acceptable in the modern world. More of this and a deeper understanding of religions role in such as terrorism needed by the 12,000 Muslims attending these conferences.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 21:01:10 UTC | #874819

Crazycharlie's Avatar Comment 7 by Crazycharlie

They should have said..

"We call apon all 99% of peaceful Muslims in England and the rest of the world to not only condemn but also ostracize and marginalize any Muslim you may know of in your schools, madrases, communities, or even in your own families, who advocate or are intent on committing acts of violence. And then report them to the appropriate authorities."

Fat chance of that.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 21:03:12 UTC | #874820

Jos Gibbons's Avatar Comment 8 by Jos Gibbons

Stevehill's technically correct comment aside, the words I intended to post here are exactly those of Disco Dan. He beat me to it. I should give my own use of such words a context (I can't speak for Disco Dan). I in no way disapprove of the action being taken here. But if they intend this to somehow vindicate Islam, it is much too little too late.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 21:06:49 UTC | #874821

Paula Kirby's Avatar Comment 9 by Paula Kirby

Stevehill: I applaud that. We'd have to be crazy to condemn it.

I agree. This is the kind of thing we have been asking of Muslims for a long time, and we should welcome it when it happens. I have organised a lot of conferences, and 12,000 attendees is a huge number, a huge achievement.

As people who are trying to be rational and fair and objective, we must avoid getting into the mindset that there's nothing that will ever satisfy us, even when what is done is exactly what we've been asking for.

Does a single conference, however large, solve all issues or reassure us about all our Islam-related concerns? Of course not. I would take issue with Tahir-ul-Qadri's suggestion that 99% of Muslims are peace-loving, for instance, since that now infamous poll of British Muslims after the London bombings showed that an alarming proportion of them felt the bombings were justified.

But is it a very welcome development? Yes, it most certainly is. Let's not be curmudgeonly about it.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 21:09:54 UTC | #874822

Atheist Mike's Avatar Comment 10 by Atheist Mike

About bloody time.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 21:14:19 UTC | #874823

Red Dog's Avatar Comment 11 by Red Dog

Comment 9 by Paula Kirby :

Stevehill: I applaud that. We'd have to be crazy to condemn it. I agree. This is the kind of thing we have been asking of Muslims for a long time, and we should welcome it when it happens. I have organised a lot of conferences, and 12,000 attendees is a huge number, a huge achievement.

As people who are trying to be rational and fair and objective, we must avoid getting into the mindset that there's nothing that will ever satisfy us, even when what is done is exactly what we've been asking for.

Does a single conference, however large, solve all issues or reassure us about all our Islam-related concerns? Of course not. I would take issue with Tahir-ul-Qadri's suggestion that 99% of Muslims are peace-loving, for instance, since that now infamous poll of British Muslims after the London bombings showed that an alarming proportion of them felt the bombings were justified.

But is it a very welcome development? Yes, it most certainly is. Let's not be curmudgeonly about it.

I agree also but its kind of depressing that except for your comment and SteveHill's all the other comments have been negative. It just shows that most of the people here don't really care about reason anymore than a fundamentalist Muslim or Christian. They just have their side and they want to piss all over anyone that doesn't agree with them.

And I strongly disagree that this is just some isolated incident. In fact just the opposite, Muslims are doing things like this all the time. The problem is that if one looney Muslim threatens to blow up South Park it gets blasted across the media for days or longer. Declarations like this happen all the time and they are mostly ignored. After 9/11 there was an overwhelming outpouring of condemnation from the Islamic world against terrorism. Even Iran came out in support of the US.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 21:21:42 UTC | #874824

xsjadolateralus's Avatar Comment 12 by xsjadolateralus

Damage control from Islam?

They would have to do a 180 on what they believe for this to actually happen. It's another case of someone saying one thing and believing another.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 21:30:24 UTC | #874827

Metamag's Avatar Comment 13 by Metamag

What about killing education, science, gays, atheists, apostates and treating women like garbage?

Have they condemned that?

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 21:31:19 UTC | #874830

Steve Zara's Avatar Comment 14 by Steve Zara

Comment 11 by Red Dog

I agree also but its kind of depressing that except for your comment and SteveHill's all the other comments have been negative. It just shows that most of the people here don't really care about reason anymore than a fundamentalist Muslim or Christian. They just have their side and they want to piss all over anyone that doesn't agree with them.

It would be a real shame if when Muslim voices spoke to condemn terrorism, some people who claimed to support rationalism refused to help spread the message of those voices.

It's never too late for such condemnation. It's a very welcome development that Muslim voices condemn Muslim terrorism. We can, and should, want more from such voices, but that should certainly not mean we refuse to recognise this positive step.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 21:51:03 UTC | #874832

shemonster's Avatar Comment 15 by shemonster

What about killing education, science, gays, atheists, apostates and treating women like garbage?

Have they condemned that?

Have to confess that while I applaud the 12,000 who condemn violence, my first thought was the above.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 21:51:51 UTC | #874833

Sean_W's Avatar Comment 16 by Sean_W

Why should Muslims, more than any other group of people, have to publicly condemn terrorism and wish for world peace in the capacity of Muslims?

This is bizarre, and must have been very difficult to do. I am both glad and perplexed.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 22:22:38 UTC | #874836

aquilacane's Avatar Comment 17 by aquilacane

This is positive. We must also remind them that threatening to kill and killing apostates is a form of terrorism that has no place in the modern world.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 22:23:03 UTC | #874837

Richie P's Avatar Comment 18 by Richie P

Of course I am pleased and support these Muslims who condemn terrorism. But to my mind there is still a significant problem. So long as you are limited to arguing only that they have misinterpretated or misunderstood an ancient Holy Book, you are not really addressing the real issue. The real issue, being of course, that the future of civilisation seems to rest upon how one happens to think about their sacred texts. Whilst this remains the case it is all too easy for a Osama Bin Laden to come along and argue that the Holy Book means this and that, and before you know it...more young men with bombs strapped to their chests ready to martyr themselves.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 22:24:02 UTC | #874838

AtheistEgbert's Avatar Comment 19 by AtheistEgbert

Dr Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri issued a fatwa for peace in London in 2010

Does anyone else notice the irony?

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 22:24:53 UTC | #874839

TurkishAtheist's Avatar Comment 20 by TurkishAtheist

they waited for 10 years to protest terrorism, what a joke, wait until an artist draws a caricature then lynching mob show their faces

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 22:33:08 UTC | #874840

Quine's Avatar Comment 21 by Quine

Comment 13 by Metamag:
What about killing education, science, gays, atheists, apostates and treating women like garbage?

Have they condemned that?

Well first, catch them doing something right, and there is chance to continue in that direction.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 22:37:02 UTC | #874841

Neodarwinian's Avatar Comment 22 by Neodarwinian

@ Red Dog

" I agree also but its kind of depressing that except for your comment and SteveHill's all the other comments have been negative. "

I do not find such dichotomous comments, devoid of any subtle appreciation of what was really written, helpful. Reason is not served by the fallacy of the excluded middle. Condemnation by word is all well and good, but real change is only intimated by conferences of the type. Islam must undergo a radical transformation to fit into the modern world and action, not lip service, is needed here.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 22:43:38 UTC | #874843

achromat666's Avatar Comment 23 by achromat666

I made a comment in another thread a few days ago about worshipers in the RCC publicly opposing the pedophilia and other things being done they largely go publicly unobserved by the church itself unless its under fire. Ordinary people wanting to make the church more responsible for the actions they commit and ending that horrible form of hypocrisy.

I see this as being no different. We can't expect change to just come from those of us who don't worship at all. We can continue to make it public, and keep up the pressure for religions in general to be responsible for their actions. But if the faithful do nothing that change takes a much longer and harder road. We can speak out against terrorism forever, but the religion itself must accept that this is happening and disown such behavior as being any part of their doctrine.

As atheists we push to the forefront the things that are wrong with religions and the dangers they present. When people in those faiths finally start publicly acknowledging the wrongs being done in the name of their religion, it helps us as well as them.

Obviously it doesn't solve all problems, but it is a step in the right direction.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 23:01:05 UTC | #874846

Chris Roberts's Avatar Comment 24 by Chris Roberts

Comment 13 by Metamag

What about killing education, science, gays, atheists, apostates and treating women like garbage? Have they condemned that?

No, but they should.

But this is a positive step, make no mistake about it.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 23:19:47 UTC | #874849

Steve Zara's Avatar Comment 25 by Steve Zara

comment 22 by Neodarwinian

Condemnation by word is all well and good, but real change is only intimated by conferences of the type. Islam must undergo a radical transformation to fit into the modern world and action, not lip service, is needed here.

This is real change, and it is politically important change. There are fundamentalist Muslisms who are attempting to persuade young men that Islam provides backing for terrorism. Statements like this from the peace conference is a powerful political rebuttal to such claims.

Statements such as this one is one of the necessary changes that would need to be part of a radical transformation. We can't tell yet if it is or not part of such a transformation.

We supporters of political change should not believe only in the macromutation of religions, that they have to make the sudden leap to adapt to the modern world. New species of religion can and must arise through micromutations, and one of those mutations we have seen here.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 23:20:14 UTC | #874850

phil rimmer's Avatar Comment 26 by phil rimmer

It can never be too little too late, for there is no alternative but to have people slowly wake up from their beguiling dreams of power and rejoin the collective pull forward into reason. At least, not for my children its not.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 23:23:26 UTC | #874852

Alan Dente's Avatar Comment 27 by Alan Dente

Annoying to read so many comments along the lines of 'too little, too late' and/or being a bit snide about this report.

How many commenters here run the real risk of injury and death when they speak out? I don't care what religion (or non-religious viewpoint) someone has, bravery is bravery, And isn't this non-aggressive, peaceful kind of sentiment exactly what we want for a safer World? Isn't this what non-theists want from muslims, particularly those living in the West?

Some of the comments above play right into the (well-wrung) hands of the 'moral relativism' idiots who drone on about atheists being just as bad as militant theists.

Grr.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 23:34:01 UTC | #874855

goddogit's Avatar Comment 28 by goddogit

It's something. Let's see what it means in practical terms as well.

I don't mind living among the "believers" at all, so long as their belief doesn't have any right to trump my rights. That BEGINS with a renunciation of violence, but in no way ends there.

When they remove themselves from openly using their religion to pervert government and, especially, allow those raised as "Muslims" to openly leave the "faith" without anything more than disappointment, Islam and I can be on friendly terms.

I'm over 50 and do not expect to live long enough for either hope to be met, however modestly, but would love to be proven wrong. Certainly the few Muslims I know were fine, reasonable folk, but they were more like what I call "Cultural Jews," who observe certain tenets of the religion just 'cos they were born and rased that way.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 23:50:40 UTC | #874858

Ornicar's Avatar Comment 29 by Ornicar

When moderate believers condamn extremist believers, that's great. No doubt about it. But if they admited that moderate religion is the cause of extremist religion, that would be much better.

What is a moderate believer anyway ? Someone who believes gods exist only every second day ? That they are just half great ? That the Koran/Bible is half true, half false ? A moderate religion is a religion that has not the political power to be extremist.

All the better if they condamn terrorism today, but let's wait until they condamn religion altogether to rejoyce.

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 23:52:51 UTC | #874859

Red Dog's Avatar Comment 30 by Red Dog

Comment 27 by Alan Dente :

Annoying to read so many comments along the lines of 'too little, too late' and/or being a bit snide about this report.

How many commenters here run the real risk of injury and death when they speak out? I don't care what religion (or non-religious viewpoint) someone has, bravery is bravery, And isn't this non-aggressive, peaceful kind of sentiment exactly what we want for a safer World? Isn't this what non-theists want from muslims, particularly those living in the West?

Some of the comments above play right into the (well-wrung) hands of the 'moral relativism' idiots who drone on about atheists being just as bad as militant theists.

Grr.

Thank you. I agree.

I also wanted to clarify from previous comments: I'm no Muslim apologist. I oppose patriarchal misogynistic societies so naturally I oppose that when it occurs in Islam and I recognize it occurs there a lot.

But as someone dedicated to reason I want to encourage people to move in the other direction. So when someone does I want to support and encourage them not snipe at them.

Also, from a moral perspective it seems to me that the duty of each individual is to be most critical of their own society. Its morally easy to attack the other. That's just siding with the people in power. Its morally risky to attack your own society and government. If I were a Muslim I would (I hope) put all my energy into critiquing Islam. As an American its my primary responsibility to point out the crimes (and there are countless numbers of them) that the US has committed against the Third world and to defend Muslims against the endless examples of scape goating that occur regularly in the US.

Previously, I said that this statement was not at all unique in the Muslim world. Here are a few links to back that up:

Muslims Condemn Terrorist Attacks

Islamic Scholars React to 9/11

International Islamic Response to 9/11

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 23:53:55 UTC | #874860