NEWS
Speaker curbs U.S. Islam myths
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Beka Smith:
- Speaker curbs U.S. Islam myths (November 2, 2007)
- Religion debates abortion (September 25, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Campus comes together for teach-in (September 20, 2001)
- Teach-in about Islam planned for Wednesday (September 18, 2001)
- Muslim students respond to Monday's Horowitz talk (October 24, 2007)
- Community and UW leaders host teach-in (September 18, 2001)
- Muslim students discuss concerns (September 18, 2001)
by Beka Smith
Friday, November 2, 2007
Peace is a central theme of Islam, according to a visiting professor from St. Mary’s University who spoke at the University of Wisconsin Thursday.
Jamal Badawi, a member of the Islamic Juridical Council of North America, used the Quran to give what Muslim Student Association Vice President Sarrah AbuLughod called a comprehensive and balanced view of modern-day Islam at his presentation.
The event, co-sponsored by the Muslim Students Association and the Middle East Studies Program, focused on myths related to the Muslim religion as well as truths central to the majority of believers.
“Islam is peace through the submission to God and the acceptance of his grace and guidance,” Badawi said, but added some find violence in the religion by interpreting one section of the Quran without paying attention to the context.
“If we use the ‘cut-and-paste’ approach, we can prove anything from anywhere,” Badawi said.
A common misconception is that the term “jihad” translates to “holy war,” but Badawi said jihad actually means exerting maximum effort.
“Every one of you is engaged with jihad, if you know it or not,” Badawi said.
According to Badawi, combative Jihad fighting is only allowed for self-defense to stop oncoming aggression or oppression. If a problem cannot be resolved through peace, Badawi said violence may be used as a last resort only if the intentions behind that combat are pure and not vengeful.
“We must understand that the phenomenon of severe violence … however wrong it may be, was not always the case,” Badawi said.
But some Muslim communities interpret the Quran in a way that leads them into violence, Badawi said.
UW junior Sabih Khwaja, a member of the Muslim Students Association, said 45 percent of Americans have a negative view of Islam and believe violence is part of the religion.
Badawi said people need to consider the historical context of Muslims’ actions, as there have been instances where Muslims were surrounded by a violent world and needed to use violent means to protect their community.
According to Badawi, another myth pervading society today is the claim Muslims are told to kill Jews and Christians.
Badawi said there are violent Muslims just as there are violent Christians and violent Jews, but these people do not reflect on the religion as a whole.
The Quran has been misquoted, according to Badawi, and nowhere in the book does it tell Muslims to kill nonbelievers.
“We recognize the right of others to have their own ways,” Badawi said.
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 10:08am):
"nowhere in the book does it tell Muslims to kill nonbelievers"
Then why do so many Muslims want to murder apostates and blasphemers? Is it just their own idea? What about all the imans that encourage violence?
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 10:46am):
"The Quran has been misquoted, according to Badawi, and nowhere in the book does it tell Muslims to kill nonbelievers."
If that's true, then perhaps you should POINT IT OUT TO ALL MUSLIMS SO THEY'LL STOP KILLING NONBELIEVERS!!! HELLO?!! ANYBODY HOME?!!!
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 11:03am):
When will a Christian be able to walk around in Mecca in the same way that a Muslim can walk around in the Vatcan City?
When will all the murder fatwas for apostasy and blasphemy be withdrawn?
When will homosexuals be allowed to live without fear of murder mandated by Islam?
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 12:25pm):
Talk to a Lebanese Christian if you want actual facts on how tolerant Islam really is.
Ask them how it is to have your country taken over by Islam.
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 12:45pm):
"Peace is a central theme of Islam"
The article first words are a lie. Just explain to me how Islam spread so far, so fast?
"nowhere in the book does it tell Muslims to kill nonbelievers"
9:5 When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way. God is forgiving and merciful.
Yeah right
Ringo the Gringo (November 2, 2007 @ 12:45pm):
Sura 9-29: "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 12:47pm):
You taqiya to me?
Ringo the Gringo (November 2, 2007 @ 12:48pm):
"Muhammad is God's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another." (Surah 48:29)
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 1:01pm):
Hmmm I guess all comments are shut off now.
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 1:35pm):
"Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted."
Hmmm my previous comment was none of those. I guess challenging someone's assertion that Islam is peaceful is haram. :-)
Elric66
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 1:49pm):
to all the above comments, did you actually go to the lecture? or are you all just cutting and pasting quotes like Dr. Badawi talked about? yes, there are people who call themselves muslims that are doing terrible things, no one has ever denied that, but they cut and paste parts of the quran out of context for their own agenda. Ever heard of the crusades? (i'm sure many christians, like myself, would be sure to make it clear that not all christians are going to go kill someone in the name of christianity) Go look up the definition of crusade and its rather similar to the definition of jihad. Or politicians taking a statistic or quote to help their viewpoint or cause?
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 2:02pm):
A shame alot of people will just take what he says for granted instead of actually reading the Qur'an and Hadiths and find out what Islam really is. It isnt pretty.
Elric66
red c1c4 (November 2, 2007 @ 2:19pm):
someone should gently remind the learned gentleman that actions speak louder than words.
what with all the suicide bombings & other acts of mass murder, the wanton destruction of cultural treasures, violent intolerance for other religious beliefs (including the schism inside Islam),the codified debasement and mutilation of women, intolerance for other cultures and values and general acts of terror, Islam has *earned* the reputation it has with many thinking people from around the world.
as it reads above: "If a problem cannot be resolved through peace, Badawi said violence may be used as a last resort only if the intentions behind that combat are pure and not vengeful."
that hardly sounds like a "religion of peace" but rather more one of aggressive expansion, especially since ""We recognize the right of others to have their own ways," Badawi said." actually means one must become a dhimmi in exchange for subservience and loyalty to the Muslim order, plus pay the jizya.
to that i say, in my best John Wayne voice, "Lan astaslem."
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 2:19pm):
"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem).
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 2:26pm):
The Quran says that it perfectly acceptable, even recommended or required, to lie to the unbelievers.
So Badawi is spouting lies and propaganda - not a big surprise.
"...45 percent of Americans have a negative view of Islam and believe violence is part of the religion."
So 55% don't know the facts?
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 3:55pm):
Dear friends,
Had you come to the lecture you would have seen that all of the chapters you just quoted have been taken out of context. It's so easy to argue when you don't have to actually get up and go learn...
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 4:02pm):
"If that's true, then perhaps you should POINT IT OUT TO ALL MUSLIMS SO THEY'LL STOP KILLING NONBELIEVERS!!! HELLO?!! ANYBODY HOME?!!!"
Chrisitans killed lots Muslims during the Crusades, and then lots of "heathen" in the New World after we "discovered" and invaded it. After that a lot of white Americans didn't want black slaves to become Christians because then they couldn't continue to abuse them. As Studs Terkel says - we are the "United States of Amnesia".
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 4:13pm):
The verses that are pasted above were covered by Badawi in his lecture. The article's summary here is egregiously inadequate (maybe intentionally?).
Anyways, according to the lecture, yes, the Qur'an contains very explicit 'commands' to kill or subdue certain peoples but what Badawi and others stress is that these verses were 'revealed' under the context of wartime. In other words, these were specific instructions to the nascent Muslim community in times of war and are historically determined.
Badawi is arguing that one cannot separate the Qur'an from the early experiences of the Muslim community. In Madinah, the Muslims encountered hostilities and thus this explains the 'war' verses.
For example, it may be analogous to a general sending instructions to his commander on the battle field. The general may tell his commander to ensure the health of the army, distribute the rations, secure the area and 'kill all enemy combatants'. So what Badawi is saying is that, both Muslims and non-Muslims, sometimes focus on the 'kill all enemy combatants' precept to the exclusion of everything else...ie out of context. When read this way, you can come to any conclusion you want about this commander but it just will not be accurate.
It should also be noted that he was not an apologist. He freely admits that the Muslim holy book does contain positive commands to engage in hostilities but points out that these cannot be taken out of their historical context.
We are free to criticize verses like these and others but to disregard context is just plain dishonest.
Doug '07
red c1c4 (November 2, 2007 @ 4:53pm):
"Chrisitans killed lots Muslims during the Crusades, and then lots of "heathen" in the New World after we "discovered" and invaded it. After that a lot of white Americans didn't want black slaves to become Christians because then they couldn't continue to abuse them. As Studs Terkel says - we are the "United States of Amnesia"."
so, because our ancestors did things we find objectionable today, we should allow similar things to be done to us and to others?
i believe this is called "failing to learn from history".
moral relativism is *not* a valid blue print for a successful society, only a doomed one.
my problem with Islam is not so much the words as the deeds. until the "moderates" rein in and change their compatriots, with their blood if needed, i am unimpressed
by arguments such as the ones in this article.
i'm sorry but "Peace through submission" is about as un-American a concept as i can think of. not only will i pass on such an "opportunity", but i will actively resist it.
red c1c4 (November 2, 2007 @ 5:04pm):
"For example, it may be analogous to a general sending instructions to his commander on the battle field. The general may tell his commander to ensure the health of the army, distribute the rations, secure the area and 'kill all enemy combatants'. So what Badawi is saying is that, both Muslims and non-Muslims, sometimes focus on the 'kill all enemy combatants' precept to the exclusion of everything else...ie out of context."
your analogy is wrong: the primary mission of an army is close with and destroy the enemy. therefore any and all orders are subordinate to that prime mission.
therefore, you saying that we should ignore that part of the order is to deny the reality of the prime directive in the Koran to lie, cheat and use force to expand the realm of Islam.
brutal honesty != dishonesty.
Lan astaslem.
not now, not tomorrow, not ever.
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 7:30pm):
"Ever heard of the crusades?"
So what is the truth about the Crusades? Scholars are still working some of that out. But much can already be said with certainty. For starters, the Crusades to the East were in every way defensive wars. They were a direct response to Muslim aggression-an attempt to turn back or defend against Muslim conquests of Christian lands.
Christians in the eleventh century were not paranoid fanatics. Muslims really were gunning for them. While Muslims can be peaceful, Islam was born in war and grew the same way. From the time of Mohammed, the means of Muslim expansion was always the sword. Muslim thought divides the world into two spheres, the Abode of Islam and the Abode of War. Christianity-and for that matter any other non-Muslim religion-has no abode. Christians and Jews can be tolerated within a Muslim state under Muslim rule. But, in traditional Islam, Christian and Jewish states must be destroyed and their lands conquered. When Mohammed was waging war against Mecca in the seventh century, Christianity was the dominant religion of power and wealth. As the faith of the Roman Empire, it spanned the entire Mediterranean, including the Middle East, where it was born. The Christian world, therefore, was a prime target for the earliest caliphs, and it would remain so for Muslim leaders for the next thousand years.
http://www.crisismagazine.com/april2002/cover.htm
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 7:44pm):
The USA is next?
As Europe's Islamization proceeds apace, the gap widens between ordinary folks' growing recognition of the outrages that are going on all around them and the movers and shakers' cynical insistence on pretending that everything's just hunky-dory.
Case in point: the responses to Covered. Uncovered., a new book on hijab. Its author, Hege Storhaug of Norway's Human Rights Service, is this country's answer to Ayaan Hirsi Ali -- a gutsy advocate of freedom who doesn't mince words about the illiberal conditions (especially for women and girls) in Europe's Muslim communities. In Covered. Uncovered. she explains why the increasing visibility in these parts of hijab -- a potent symbol of totalitarianism and sexual oppression -- should not be taken lightly.
The result? A full-scale media assault -- marked not by honest engagement with Storhaug's arguments but by lies, more lies, and sheer personal abuse. Norway's Dagbladet alone has published pieces by Amin Asskali of the Arabic Student Association, who accused the "woman-hating" Storhaug of "creating intolerance"; by Iffit Qureshi, who labeled her a "totalitarian...out to crush religious freedom"; and by Dagbladet opinion editor (and, ahem, former head of the Communist group Red Youth) Marte Michelet, whose litany of charges against Storhaug included "burkaphobia," an "irrational fear of Islam," "paranoid delusions," and "hateful contempt" for Muslim girls.
"It is absolutely crucial," said Michelet in a radio interview, "that Hege Storhaug's campaign to undermine the Muslim religious minority's rights in Norway be stopped."
Yes: "Storhaug's campaign...must be stopped."
As some readers will recall, it was just this sort of rhetoric that led to the 2002 murder of Pim Fortuyn. Fortuyn, like Storhaug, believed passionately in individual rights -- but because he dared to point out that many Dutch Muslims despised those rights, his country's pols, profs, and pundits labeled him a racist and xenophobe (precisely the words, by the way, that Magnus E. Marsdal, a veteran of the Communist organizations Attac and Red Youth and of the Communist newspaper Klassekampen, hurled at Storhaug the other day on taxpayer-supported Norwegian public radio). In short, Fortuyn was demonized as a threat to the very liberty he was fighting to preserve. Among those who heard that this fascist must be stopped was a man named Volkert van der Graaf.
The rest is history.
Fortuyn's murder should have put an end to the character assassinations of the advocates of freedom. Nope. Instead they've only grown more sophisticated. Nowadays when someone like Ayaan Hirsi Ali assails Islamic fundamentalism, the clever thing to do is call her a fundamentalist -- because she's so uncompromising in her insistence on liberty, get it?
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 7:57pm):
From the safe distance of many centuries, it is easy enough to scowl in disgust at the Crusades. Religion, after all, is nothing to fight wars over. But we should be mindful that our medieval ancestors would have been equally disgusted by our infinitely more destructive wars fought in the name of political ideologies. And yet, both the medieval and the modern soldier fight ultimately for their own world and all that makes it up. Both are willing to suffer enormous sacrifice, provided that it is in the service of something they hold dear, something greater than themselves. Whether we admire the Crusaders or not, it is a fact that the world we know today would not exist without their efforts. The ancient faith of Christianity, with its respect for women and antipathy toward slavery, not only survived but flourished. Without the Crusades, it might well have followed Zoroastrianism, another of Islam's rivals, into extinction.
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 8:08pm):
He's Saudi author and cleric, "Dr." Muhammad Al-'Arifi, who in a remarkable segment broadcast on Saudi and Kuwaiti television in September, counseled young Muslim men on how to treat their wives.
"Admonish them -- once, twice, three times, four times, ten times," he advised. "If this doesn't help, refuse to share their beds."
And if that doesn't work?
"Beat them," one of his three young advisees responded.
"That's right," Al-'Arifi said.
He goes on to calmly explain to the young men that hitting their future wives in the face is a no-no.
"Beating in the face is forbidden, even when it comes to animals," he explained. "Even if you want your camel or donkey to start walking, you are not allowed to beat it in the face. If this is true for animals, it is all the more true when it comes to humans. So beatings should be light and not in the face."
His final words of wisdom?
"Woman, it has gone too far. I can't bear it anymore," he tells the men to tell their wives. "If he beats her, the beatings must be light and must not make her face ugly.
"He must beat her where it will not leave marks. He should not beat her on the hand... He should beat her in some places where it will not cause any damage. He should not beat her like he would beat an animal or a child -- slapping them right and left.
"Unfortunately, many husbands beat their wives only when they get mad, and when they start beating, it as if they are punching a wall -- they beat with their hands, right and left, and sometimes use their feet. Brother, it is a human being you are beating. This is forbidden. He must not do this."
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 9:24pm):
No violence?
Why all the murder between Sunni and Shia Muslims?
Why all the murder and rape of black Muslims by Arab Muslims?
Anonymous (November 2, 2007 @ 9:29pm):
Through the doctrine of hatred, Islam incites Muslims against non-Muslims and proposes Jehad as the solution to make Islam the dominant faith. What is Jehad? It is the battle against unbelievers such as the Hindus, the Christians, the Jews, the atheists - in fact, unbelievers of all sorts.
Jehad is nothing but an Inducement to Murder and Plunder non-Muslims for their Sheer Crime of Not Believing in Muhammad.
Anonymous (November 3, 2007 @ 7:21pm):
Cubing myths??????????
It appears Muslims are not on a journey of truth, because they prefer to threaten those who would expose the Koran to the harsh light of criticism. If this were not truth then why do most scholarly critics of Islam have to publish under false names. Why? Because so called truth loving Muslims will kill them.
Anonymous (November 3, 2007 @ 7:25pm):
The easiest way to understand is, again, to take them at their word. Bassam Tibi, a Muslim professor at Gottingen University in Germany, gave an interesting speech a few months after 11 September: 'Both sides should acknowledge candidly that although they might use identical terms these mean different things to each of them, ' he said. 'The word "peace", for example, implies to a Muslim the extension of the Dar al-Islam - or "House of Islam" - to the entire world. This is completely different from the Enlightenment concept of eternal peace that dominates Western thought.' Only when the entire world is a Dar al-Islam will it be a Dar aSalam, or 'House of Peace'.
The objective isn't a self-governing Palestine but the death of the West.
Anonymous (November 3, 2007 @ 8:17pm):
This is a load of apologist HOOEY.
The Quran calls for the punishment and death for infidels MANY times:
"God's curse be upon the infidels! Evil is that for which they have bartered away their souls. To deny God's own revelation, grudging that He should reveal His bounty to whom He chooses from among His servants! They have incurred God's most inexorable wrath. An ignominious punishment awaits the unbelievers." --Q 2:92-6
"Fight for the sake of God those that fight against you, but do not attack them first. God does not love the aggressors. [This part is, of course, conveniently ignored by the fanatics, but the following is not ignored.]
"Slay them wherever you find them. Drive them out of the places from which they drove you. Idolatry is worse than carnage." --Q 2:190-3
"When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them." --Q 9:5
"Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate." --Q 9:73
"God has purchased from the faithful their lives and worldly goods and in return has promised them the Garden. They will fight for the cause of God, slay and be slain." --Q 9:111
(Note the "9:11" in that last scripture...)
Yeah, yeah, I know - NOW we're not going to deny all those quotes are in there. We're going to cry "context!" Well, guess what? Muslim fanatics have used those quotes in or out of context to kill some 270 MILLION non-Muslims since Islam was created.
Even if we were to accept these "moderate" Muslims interpretation of Islam, I for one do not want to submit to God or any other invisible tyrant in the sky. Nor do I believe that the character called "Allah" in the Quran IS the God of the cosmos. nor will I EVER accept that a man who repeatedly raped a 9-year-old girl, as well as many other SLAVES he had kidnapped after murdering their families, is the "prophet of God."
I am not interested in submitting to your god, nor in having you invade my neighborhood, set up an obnoxious mosque with an obnoxious mullah making obnoxious noises night and day. Or watching men bowing down with their arses in the air five times a day. Or seeing women covered in veils scurrying around in fear of everything in sight, and so on. So, you can continue making all the apologies, but I will NEVER like Islam, no matter how much you sweeten it up.
Anonymous (November 4, 2007 @ 1:32pm):
Hey idiots-no one is asking you to 'submit' to Islam.
Anonymous (November 4, 2007 @ 4:42pm):
The segregation of Muslims and non-Muslims is enshrined in the Qur'an and evident throughout Islamic history. According to Islamic theology the world is divided between the dar al Islam (House of Islam [submission]) and the dar al harb (House of War): until Islam reigns there will be a permanent state of conflict between believers and non-believers.
Verse 9:29 forms the basis of the system of dhimmitude prevalent in the Islamic empire, which institutionalised the second-class status of non-Muslims (specifically Christians and Jews) and forced them to pay tribute for 'protection':
"Fight those who believe not in God nor the last day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of truth, (even if they are) of the people of the Book [Christians and Jews], until they pay the jizya [poll tax] with willing submission, feel themselves subdued."
Anonymous (November 4, 2007 @ 9:46pm):
"Hey idiots-no one is asking you to 'submit' to Islam."
Have you listened to/read anything said/written by Muslims? Anything at all?
Are you totally ignorant?
You are unbelievably arrogant (as well as ignorant) to call anyone else an idiot.
Anonymous (November 5, 2007 @ 10:58am):
Wow, amazing that I've found the Church of Ann Coulter, Our Messiah.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
