4 ms·

I think maybe he meant from the perspective of muslims. That answer is here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27Asma%27_bint_Marwan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

by waps 12y ago

I think maybe he meant from the perspective of muslims. That answer is here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27Asma%27_bint_Marwan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27Asma%27_bint_Marwan This is what makes this so difficult : muslims killing because of negative opinions on islam is something that is sanctioned by the religion, and that was practiced for over 15 centuries now. A very uncomfortable question is what muslim children in the west are taught on this question. I'm sure this will get downvoted, but it's simply the truth.

sehr 12y ago
IIRC there are a lot more different sects of Islam then there are/have ever been of Christianity. Painting over a billion people with that broad a brush seems disingenuous to say the least.
- waps 12y ago
  There are no sects of islam that don't accept the prophet's actions as holy and unconditionally right. There are only differences about what those actions were, famously whether he appointed Ali as caliph or not (that's the difference between sunni and shi'a islam). All schools except one are part of all sects, all sects share all hadith, just not all hadith interpretations (they, and their many addendums and rewritten versions -very roughly- correspond to what is meant by a "school"). This is part of the islamic canon, which as I said is shared by all sects. Frankly, if this isn't in a sect, nobody would call them an islamic sect, but something else (example : the Baha'i, which originate from within islam, but nobody seriously considers muslims, merely because they disagree that the actions of the prophet were the "final" authority on morality. Their claim is that moral authority is to be found in any number of individuals, and that muhammad's teachings (especially the more insane ones) can and have been overridden. For this, there is a standing death penalty for any Baha'i that gets caught in >20 muslim countries. This mostly to illustrate that the vast majority of muslims accept the Bint Marwan story as moral authority, and that dozens of muslim countries consider it reasonable to execute people for not doing so). I would also like to point out that killing for insults to islam is quite popular amongst muslims, even in the west. And frankly, we can't realistically tolerate even 1% of them having this opinion (because it'll lead to events like the Hebdo ones). But even in general you're wrong "in practice". There are 2 islamic sects worth mentioning : sunni islam (~82%) and twelver shi'a (~13%). Yes the remainder has a million sects but, they're outlawed and persecuted in islamic nations, and their numbers are tiny. Furthermore, given that Christianity is both older and much richer in spread (meaning it's spread in more varied cultures), much larger number of adherents, and variety (many Christian sects in single locations), so I'd be extremely surprised if there were more offshoots of islam (unlike islam, Christianity seems to leave older cultures mostly intact. Comparing South America with Indonesia, for example. In Indonesia, the old culture is completely erased. This makes regional branches of Christianity have their own identity, and leads to offshoots, whereas the violent repression that islam historically was spread by did not exactly promote diversity)
azth 12y ago
I don't know why you keep pasting that Wikipedia link. It even says that this story is false and fabricated.
- waps 12y ago
  I must have missed that part of it. It contains some apologia, but it also contains links to the primary sources. Look up what those sources are. Furthermore, this is a standard part of islamic law (killing for criticism). Do you dispute that as well ? Plus muhammad had over a dozen poets executed, as well as entire camps of people suspected merely of leaving his army. Are you going to call all of it false ? Famously he had a tribe massacred, including women and children because one woman in it refused to marry one of his soldiers. I don't get how anyone can defend this monster.
  - azth 12y ago
    > but it also contains links to the primary sources. Look up what those sources are. I have looked up more sources in Arabic (not mentioned on the Wikipedia page). There is practically a universal consensus among scholars that the narrations of this incident are fabricated, based on analyzing the chain of narration (all contain known liars and fabricators). > Furthermore, this is a standard part of islamic law (killing for criticism). Do you dispute that as well ? Yes. The religion is open to criticism. Show me where it says otherwise. > Plus muhammad had over a dozen poets executed, as well as entire camps of people suspected merely of leaving his army... Famously he had a tribe massacred... Citation needed. Again, it's not about being "famous" or not, it's about whether a certain narration conforms to the very rigorous standards that have been set in examining such accounts, not to mention other approaches to determine authenticity. Otherwise, anybody can say anything (e.g. all four Bibles have anonymous authors). Each particular incident must be examined to see what exactly happened, instead of throwing blanket statements like this.
    - waps 12y ago
      > Yes. The religion is open to criticism. Show me where it says otherwise. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_blasphemy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_blasphemy I find it hard to believe you're somehow not aware of this. Are you serious.

by waps 12y ago

sehr 12y ago

IIRC there are a lot more different sects of Islam then there are/have ever been of Christianity. Painting over a billion people with that broad a brush seems disingenuous to say the least.

waps 12y ago
There are no sects of islam that don't accept the prophet's actions as holy and unconditionally right. There are only differences about what those actions were, famously whether he appointed Ali as caliph or not (that's the difference between sunni and shi'a islam). All schools except one are part of all sects, all sects share all hadith, just not all hadith interpretations (they, and their many addendums and rewritten versions -very roughly- correspond to what is meant by a "school"). This is part of the islamic canon, which as I said is shared by all sects. Frankly, if this isn't in a sect, nobody would call them an islamic sect, but something else (example : the Baha'i, which originate from within islam, but nobody seriously considers muslims, merely because they disagree that the actions of the prophet were the "final" authority on morality. Their claim is that moral authority is to be found in any number of individuals, and that muhammad's teachings (especially the more insane ones) can and have been overridden. For this, there is a standing death penalty for any Baha'i that gets caught in >20 muslim countries. This mostly to illustrate that the vast majority of muslims accept the Bint Marwan story as moral authority, and that dozens of muslim countries consider it reasonable to execute people for not doing so). I would also like to point out that killing for insults to islam is quite popular amongst muslims, even in the west. And frankly, we can't realistically tolerate even 1% of them having this opinion (because it'll lead to events like the Hebdo ones). But even in general you're wrong "in practice". There are 2 islamic sects worth mentioning : sunni islam (~82%) and twelver shi'a (~13%). Yes the remainder has a million sects but, they're outlawed and persecuted in islamic nations, and their numbers are tiny. Furthermore, given that Christianity is both older and much richer in spread (meaning it's spread in more varied cultures), much larger number of adherents, and variety (many Christian sects in single locations), so I'd be extremely surprised if there were more offshoots of islam (unlike islam, Christianity seems to leave older cultures mostly intact. Comparing South America with Indonesia, for example. In Indonesia, the old culture is completely erased. This makes regional branches of Christianity have their own identity, and leads to offshoots, whereas the violent repression that islam historically was spread by did not exactly promote diversity)

azth 12y ago

I don't know why you keep pasting that Wikipedia link. It even says that this story is false and fabricated.

waps 12y ago
I must have missed that part of it. It contains some apologia, but it also contains links to the primary sources. Look up what those sources are. Furthermore, this is a standard part of islamic law (killing for criticism). Do you dispute that as well ? Plus muhammad had over a dozen poets executed, as well as entire camps of people suspected merely of leaving his army. Are you going to call all of it false ? Famously he had a tribe massacred, including women and children because one woman in it refused to marry one of his soldiers. I don't get how anyone can defend this monster.
- azth 12y ago
  > but it also contains links to the primary sources. Look up what those sources are. I have looked up more sources in Arabic (not mentioned on the Wikipedia page). There is practically a universal consensus among scholars that the narrations of this incident are fabricated, based on analyzing the chain of narration (all contain known liars and fabricators). > Furthermore, this is a standard part of islamic law (killing for criticism). Do you dispute that as well ? Yes. The religion is open to criticism. Show me where it says otherwise. > Plus muhammad had over a dozen poets executed, as well as entire camps of people suspected merely of leaving his army... Famously he had a tribe massacred... Citation needed. Again, it's not about being "famous" or not, it's about whether a certain narration conforms to the very rigorous standards that have been set in examining such accounts, not to mention other approaches to determine authenticity. Otherwise, anybody can say anything (e.g. all four Bibles have anonymous authors). Each particular incident must be examined to see what exactly happened, instead of throwing blanket statements like this.
  - waps 12y ago
    > Yes. The religion is open to criticism. Show me where it says otherwise. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_blasphemy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_blasphemy I find it hard to believe you're somehow not aware of this. Are you serious.