Islam - Religion of Peace?

[NathanMorgan]

Time to start another contraverisial debate I'm thinking. What better than Islam? here's what i think of Islam....

Islam is an vile philosophy based on hatred of non-believers, suppression of women and the adaptation to Islam by all non-believers by any means necessary.
 
I know we can always trust the BBC and other government coerced organisations to wheel out a Muslim or two to denounce the atrocities we see committed by these medieval hate-mongers but consider this:
 
Islam instructs its believers  that in the promotion of Islam within a non-Islamic state it is completely acceptable to lie to and con non-believers in order that Islam can gain a foothold in that land. This is what they do.

This is a prime example of the disasters of multiculturalism and I suppose we all have to pray they never get themselves into politics. The solution would be the BNP, if you ask me.

Anyone else agree with me? Probably not…

Lets here it folks, what do you think of Islam, is it really a religion of peace?

[Welsh-Angel]

Well i can say some are not peace in non-believer countries. For example the bombing on buses and trains, they only do it if they want something. The thing that annoys me is that they have got the government wrapped around their little finger, if they want a mosque in our country, they can have one, if we want a welsh school in their country that is not allowed, we are too soft, we just welcome anyone into the country.

[Reuben]

Well you do have a point Welsh Angel, though as a Canadian. I think it's better to Welcome everyone. Even if they wouldn't do the same. It's just the way i think

[legionreturns]

we are too soft, we just welcome anyone into the country.

Surely that's a part of what makes this, one of the oldest democracies in the world, great? That is surely the reason why people want to come and live in a society that accepts you for your humanity, not your religion, colour, creed or polictics?

I'll grant you, a great many terrible things have been done in the name of Islam. Does anyone remember the crusades though? The idea that a religion can be forced upon someone with arms and conquest was one that originated with Christianity. That particularly foolish errand went wrong and rightly so.

Now there is nothing intrinsicly wrong with the writings of the Quran, it's interpretation that is the issue. That is why there are hard line, Suni, Arab etc etc versions of Islam. The clerics that teach all use the same book, they just interpret it differently.

Is that any different to the bible? Why is it we have Cathoics, Baptists, Methodists, JW's, Calvanists etc etc all of whom have slightly, and in some cases, radically different interpretations of parts of the bible.

Now I am fanatically anti-religion in all its forms no matter what the religion, but I won't listen to factually innacurate summary criticism of a religion based not on facts, but on popular myth.

Salman Rushdie is a disgusting man for the book that he wrote, all of which was wrong. Islam is fundamentally a religion of peace. So is Christianity. Does not the bible say "an eye for an eye" and talk of many a war in Gods name though? This doesn't make it an instruction.

[Hyde]

If i could add one thing?  My History teacher visited Saudi Arabia last May and she found out that though the women are suppressed they are happy.  The women get treated a lot better there than in the states.  In the states they are teated as sex objects but in Islamic countries they are coveted for the "jewels" that they are.  The reason they wear those veils is because they don't want other men staring at them so they can be more respected.

A little fact:  If a women is on an elevator and a man approaches to enter said elevator, the woman can just make a slight gesture and the man will take the next elevator.

[NathanMorgan]

we are too soft, we just welcome anyone into the country.

Surely that's a part of what makes this, one of the oldest democracies in the world, great? That is surely the reason why people want to come and live in a society that accepts you for your humanity, not your religion, colour, creed or polictics?

If you’re talking about the many disasters of immigration, in this case, multiculturalism, then I would have to disagree with what you say there. The terrorist attacks are a direct cause of the so-called multiculturalism. It’s just a few staunch old lefties that don’t see what a disaster multiculturalism is, but in time hopefully they will.

Now there is nothing intrinsicly wrong with the writings of the Quran, it's interpretation that is the issue. That is why there are hard line, Suni, Arab etc etc versions of Islam. The clerics that teach all use the same book, they just interpret it differently.

Again, I’d like to take the time to challenge that point of yours. They consider it an honour to die for Islam, and take as many whites or non-Muslims with them. Here's how/why...

Islam is today being portrayed as a peaceful and tolerant religion. History proves otherwise! Though there were certainly periods of relative tranquility and tolerance, minorities and non-Muslims have always been prosecuted under Islam. In fact, Islamic ideology is based upon an intense hatred of the non-Muslim. For Muslims, there exist two kinds of non-Muslim enemies... kafir (non-believers in Islam) and ahl al-kitab (People of the Book). Kafir, such as Buddhists and Hindus, must either convert to Islam or face execution. People of the Book include Jews and Christians. These people need only submit to Muslim authority to avoid forced conversion or death. Although they may keep their original faith, their status becomes dhimmi (a "protected," yet inferior non-Muslim status). So instead of outright forced conversion or slaughter, the Christians and Jews would be allowed to remain somewhat unmolested as long as they acknowledged the superiority of the Muslim. However, as 100,000 dead Lebanese Christians and Israel's beleaguered Jewish population have discovered over the years, these guarantees have proved worthless!

The Holy Qur'an (the "Bible" of Islam) was inspired by Mohammed. No one knows his last name because Mohammed could neither read nor write. But one thing is for certain. Whoever wrote this sick collection of madness must have had his brain baking far too long in the hot desert sun of Arabia! The name "Mohammed means "Highly Praised" but to be honest, "Highly Crased" seems more appropriate.

In effect, Islam remains a religion of the Dark Ages. It is the most violent and intolerant faith that has ever been presented to mankind! A prima facie example of the insanity found within the Qur'an is the fascist, warlike notion of "Jihad," or "Holy War." Apologists for Islam say "Jihad" is one personal struggle to obtain a higher moral standard. But what it really represents is a violent military action (even terrorism) against the non-Muslim. If you don't quite believe this, visit Ground Zero where New York City's World Trade Center once stood! Or if that’s not enough, look at the London bombings, or more recently, the Glasgow Airport bombings – which by the way, shows us just how much of a sham multiculturalism is.

Just wait on the race wars; they’re coming my friends....

[legionreturns]

Oh dear dear me, here we go again. I remember now why I don't bother to debate with you! You make things up to support your bigoted, racist, out of date views that I can only assume you got from someone else and then pass them off as your own.

End of topic as far as I'm concerned and I would implore a mod to delete that random racist dribble before it gets our site closed down.

[NathanMorgan]

Oh dear dear me, here we go again. I remember now why I don't bother to debate with you! You make things up to support your bigoted, racist, out of date views that I can only assume you got from someone else and then pass them off as your own.

End of topic as far as I'm concerned and I would implore a mod to delete that random racist dribble before it gets our site closed down.

That's a funny post. I seem to remember several debates we've had but lets focus on the main points of your post shall we? One thing I've noticed about the liberal left is that they are brilliant at closing down the argument. I suppose you could take that as a strange compliment if you wished. Anyway, I've just shown how this mindless process works - enter into a debate about something like Islam, immigration or multiculturalism and it wont be long before you're accused of racism. Which, by the way, is a bit like playing the Lamborghini Countach or Hypersoar or Galactus in a game of Top Trumps: it beats absolutely everything!

Similar trends apply on most major political topics you can name. Anti-Europe? You are a xenophobe or a Little Englander. Pro-grammer-schools? You're an elitist. Pro-nuclear? Chernobyl. Worried about the growing use of vails, or the rational awareness of Islam? You're Islamophobic. Suspect the eco-lobby may be overstating its case? You're a climate-change denier.

In all these stated cases, and the Islamic debate we're having right now, these insults are used as nothing more than a way of circumventing debate. For example: "My opponent is so unspeakably vile," they imply, "that his views cannot possibly be taken seriously." I've also noticed that this technique is far more often used by the left than the right. Why? Basically because, judged purely on their merits, the rights arguments will almost always win.

Oh another few things thing I forgot to mention:
1. Your assumption was incorrect.
2. Whenever I refer to Islam, don't call me a racist. Islam is a religion, not a race you wet minded fool..

[Welsh-Angel]

Muslims now seem to have a bad name to us because we can go on a plane to get to our holiday destination and there maybe a muslim on the plane we now automatically think *omfg a muslim, he's gonna hijack the plane* *oh my where can i sit? he might have planted a bomb under that one* they are making us paranoid. When my brother went on holiday to the Dominican Republic he got on the plane and saw 2 muslims sitting down chatting and he panicked, he told girlfriend that he wasn't getting on the plane because there muslims on it but she told him that he had to get on the plane but he was scared to get on just in case they had a plan. So he finally got on and took his seat and he said "why are they on the plane?" and it so happened that everyone else had the same question in their mind.

Nathan....don't you usually say to get a vasectomy at the end of your little lists? What's changed? lol.

[NathanMorgan]

Nathan....don't you usually say to get a vasectomy at the end of your little lists? What's changed? lol.

Lol, yeah... but I fear it may be too late.

Actually I think I only said that once if I remember, but I'm sure it was deserved. Actually it was, it was on the gay topic thing and some guy started name-calling - personally attacking - and that set me off. This time, I got called a racist and a bigot... so I suppose my version of personal attack was only in defense.

[danty]

End of topic as far as I'm concerned and I would implore a mod to delete that random racist dribble before it gets our site closed down.

Here at Debating Online we would like all of our members to have their fair say. As NathanMorgan did not aim any of his comments, however offensive, at you or another member directly, and you understand when signing up that volatile/controversial posts may be made, we will not remove posts or topics that raise enough interest. I would, however, remove it on the Author's request (assuming the topic was still on it's first page).

I personally see nothing wrong with his post. He stated his opinion, and backed it up with some information that he has gathered. Why not find some facts to retaliate with, rather than citing racism?

The website cannot be shut down for racism, as racism is not an illegal offense, only EXTREME racism/prejudice is. We welcome everyone to DO, and everyone is entitled to their own say. I will not limit your freedom of speech on this forum, as that's what debating is all about. Keep your political correctness ("OMG HE SAID THE N- WORD - HE'S A RACIST") for real life issues. it has no place here.

Regards,

Dantyboi

[NathanMorgan]

I personally see nothing wrong with his post. He stated his opinion, and backed it up with some information that he has gathered. Why not find some facts to retaliate with, rather than citing racism?

The website cannot be shut down for racism, as racism is not an illegal offense, only EXTREME racism/prejudice is. We welcome everyone to DO, and everyone is entitled to their own say. I will not limit your freedom of speech on this forum, as that's what debating is all about. Keep your political correctness ("OMG HE SAID THE N- WORD - HE'S A RACIST") for real life issues. it has no place here.

Exactly! It's laughable that I got smeared as a racist because Islam is a religion, not a race. That's like you legionreturns saying that you are apposed to all religion (which I'm sure you are), and me labeling you the ultimate racist. Whereas I'm only apposed to such violent religions like Islam, and I get called racist? Why?  I'm assuming it's because it's much easier to attempt to smite the right with such names as 'racist' than actually answer to what's in front of you. It's blatant circumventing - something the PC left-wingers are good at.

[Gantidge]

The terrorist attacks are a direct cause of the so-called multiculturalism. It’s just a few staunch old lefties that don’t see what a disaster multiculturalism is, but in time hopefully they will.

Nnnnnah see I don't think we will. I think we're gonna hold up multiculturalism for quite a while, as it's such a good thing.

History proves otherwise!

Deary me that's quite poor of you to overlook that every religion in history has been killing in the name of religion. Surely you have to agree that Xianity is such a terrible religion, as it went over to the Americas, slaughtered the indiginous peoples there and 'converted' them to Jesus. What about the crusades which Xians went on in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Period? As a part of chivalry, a crusade was the best thing to do to ensure a place in Heaven. Are you telling me that Islam is the only Religion of Violence?

The Holy Qur'an (the "Bible" of Islam) was inspired by Mohammed. No one knows his last name because Mohammed could neither read nor write. But one thing is for certain. Whoever wrote this sick collection of madness must have had his brain baking far too long in the hot desert sun of Arabia! The name "Mohammed means "Highly Praised" but to be honest, "Highly Crased" seems more appropriate.

The Bible (the "Bible" of Xianity) was inspired by Jesus. No one knows his last name, because Jesus could never read or write. But one thing is for certain. Whoever wrote this sick collection of madness must have had his brain baking far too long in the hot sun of Rome! The name "Jesus" means "salvation" and "Christ" means the "annointed one", but to be honest, can anyone see some similarities here? 

The Qur'an and the Bible share so much it's unbelievable. I still hold that one day back in the day, two dudes got together to create a religion. But they disagreed on one point, so one guy stormed off and created Judaism, and the other Islam. Then the son of the Jew made Xianity. They all talk of Abraham, Noah, prophets, saviours, for God's (or is that Allah's, which also means God's) sake, the Qur'an mentions Jesus!

Whenever I refer to Islam, don't call me a racist. Islam is a religion, not a race you wet minded fool..

Yes yes you are quite right, it is a religion. However, as a phallacy of democracy, racism has come to mean prejudism or discrimination against a group of people different to ourselves. A hate of the French isn't racist, it's being a bigot, but the word is still used. So give a little slack to all those poor souls who don't know which words to use.  And it is true that the Religious Discrimination Act 2006 did not get through like the Racism Act of 2005. But it nearly did. So be careful Nathan how strongly you criticise someone's beliefs, because they might not be too happy about it. If you don't care about what they think of you, well just sleep with a baseball bat under you bed.

Similar trends apply on most major political topics you can name. Anti-Europe? You are a xenophobe or a Little Englander. Pro-grammer-schools? You're an elitist. Pro-nuclear? Chernobyl. Worried about the growing use of vails, or the rational awareness of Islam? You're Islamophobic. Suspect the eco-lobby may be overstating its case? You're a climate-change denier.

I'm sure you mother told you this at one point in your life: ignore them and they'll just go away. People class different believers all the time. It's their way of getting to them. It's just a name. If youy believe in grammar schools, then you have to admitt to being an elitist, whether or not you agree with the term. In the same way, if you're going to be critical of a religion, you have to be ready to accept some flak, it's how humans work. Whether or not you are labelled correctly, you have to accept that people are going to be angry when you come close to doing something almost illegal.

Just remember, there are lost of nice, friendly Muslims out there, just like I'm sure there are some nice friendly Christians out there.

[NathanMorgan]

The terrorist attacks are a direct cause of the so-called multiculturalism. It’s just a few staunch old lefties that don’t see what a disaster multiculturalism is, but in time hopefully they will.

Nnnnnah see I don't think we will. I think we're gonna hold up multiculturalism for quite a while, as it's such a good thing.

A good thing? I fail to see that point. Tell me, in what way, has it been good for you or anyone else in these lands?

History proves otherwise!

Deary me that's quite poor of you to overlook that every religion in history has been killing in the name of religion. Surely you have to agree that Xianity is such a terrible religion, as it went over to the Americas, slaughtered the indiginous peoples there and 'converted' them to Jesus. What about the crusades which Xians went on in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Period? As a part of chivalry, a crusade was the best thing to do to ensure a place in Heaven. Are you telling me that Islam is the only Religion of Violence?

Allow me to shed some light on this matter as you seem to be rather ill-informed. You’re suggesting that the Bible is as bad as Islam, from what I can infer. I’m not going to bother typing these out, but I’ll give you the reference numbers and you can check these for yourself. New Testament: (Luke 19:26-27), (Matthew 10:34-35). If you can’t figure those out and how they actually don’t promote violence, tell me and I’ll be glad to fill you in. Then there are Old Testament passages to be considered as well, namely: (Deuteronomy 7:1-2), (Deuteronomy 20: 10-17), and (Numbers 31: 17-18).
Pretty strong stuff, at least in the Old Testament, right? Just as bad as “Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them” (Qur’an 9:5) and “Therefore, when ye meet the unbelievers in fight, smite at their necks; at length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly on them” (Qur’an 47:4) and all the rest, right? Wrong. Unless you happen to be a Hittite, Girgas*ite, Amorite, Canaanite, Perizzite, Hivite, or Jebusite, these biblical passages simply do not apply to you. The Qur’an exhorts believers to fight unbelievers without specifying anywhere in the text that only certain unbelievers are to be fought, or only for a certain period of time, or some other distinction. Taking the texts at face value, the command to make war against unbelievers is open-ended and universal. The Old Testament, in contrast, records God’s commands to Israelites to make war against particular people only. This is jarring to modern sensibilities, to be sure, but it does not amount to the same thing. That’s one reason why Jews and Christians haven’t formed terror groups around the world that quote these Scriptures to justify killing civilian non-combatants.
By contrast, Osama bin Laden, who is the most visible exponent of a terror network that extends from Indonesia to Nigeria and into Western Europe and the Americas, quotes from the Qur’an copiously in his communiqués. In his 1996 “Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the To Holy Places,” he quotes suras 3:145; 47:4-6; 2:154; 9:14; 47:19; 8:72; and of course the notorious “Verse of the Sword,” sura 9:5. In 2003, on the first day of the Muslim Holy Celebration Eid al-Adha, the Feast of Sacrifice, he began a sermon: “Praise be to Allah who revealed in who revealed in the verse of the Sword to his servant and messenger (The Prophet, Muhammad), in order to establish truth and abolish falsehood.” Of course, the devil can quote scripture for his own purpose, but Osama’s use of these and other passages in his messages is consistent with traditional understanding of the Qur’an. When the modern-day Jews and Christians read their Bibles, they simply don’t interpret the passages cited as exhorting them to violent actions against unbelievers. This is due to the centuries of interpretive traditions that have moved away from literalism regarding these passages. But in Islam, there is no comparable interpretive tradition. The jihad passages in the Qur'an are anything but a dead letter. In Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and elsewhere, a key recruiting ground for jihad terrorists groups is the Islamic school: The students learn that they must wage jihad warfare, and then thee groups give them the opportunity.

The Holy Qur'an (the "Bible" of Islam) was inspired by Mohammed. No one knows his last name because Mohammed could neither read nor write. But one thing is for certain. Whoever wrote this sick collection of madness must have had his brain baking far too long in the hot desert sun of Arabia! The name "Mohammed means "Highly Praised" but to be honest, "Highly Crased" seems more appropriate.

The Bible (the "Bible" of Xianity) was inspired by Jesus. No one knows his last name, because Jesus could never read or write. But one thing is for certain. Whoever wrote this sick collection of madness must have had his brain baking far too long in the hot sun of Rome! The name "Jesus" means "salvation" and "Christ" means the "annointed one", but to be honest, can anyone see some similarities here? 

His last name is Christ. Y'know, Jesus Christ?

Whenever I refer to Islam, don't call me a racist. Islam is a religion, not a race you wet minded fool..

Yes yes you are quite right, it is a religion. However, as a phallacy of democracy, racism has come to mean prejudism or discrimination against a group of people different to ourselves. A hate of the French isn't racist, it's being a bigot, but the word is still used. So give a little slack to all those poor souls who don't know which words to use.  And it is true that the Religious Discrimination Act 2006 did not get through like the Racism Act of 2005. But it nearly did. So be careful Nathan how strongly you criticise someone's beliefs, because they might not be too happy about it. If you don't care about what they think of you, well just sleep with a baseball bat under you bed.

No. Racism is a form of discrimination based on race, and race alone. I quote Wikipedia: According to the Oxford English Dictionary, racism is a belief or ideology that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially to distinguish it as being either superior or inferior to another race or races.

Similar trends apply on most major political topics you can name. Anti-Europe? You are a xenophobe or a Little Englander. Pro-grammer-schools? You're an elitist. Pro-nuclear? Chernobyl. Worried about the growing use of vails, or the rational awareness of Islam? You're Islamophobic. Suspect the eco-lobby may be overstating its case? You're a climate-change denier.

I'm sure you mother told you this at one point in your life: ignore them and they'll just go away. People class different believers all the time. It's their way of getting to them. It's just a name. If youy believe in grammar schools, then you have to admitt to being an elitist, whether or not you agree with the term. In the same way, if you're going to be critical of a religion, you have to be ready to accept some flak, it's how humans work. Whether or not you are labelled correctly, you have to accept that people are going to be angry when you come close to doing something almost illegal.

Illegal? Explain, please…

Just remember, there are lost of nice, friendly Muslims out there, just like I'm sure there are some nice friendly Christians out there.

Two things that annoy me about that. One is that you’re stating that there are friendly Muslims, without any form of disbelief in your tone. Where as when talking about Christians, you say that you’re sure there are friendly one’s out there. Sounds to me like there’s a hint of doubt in there. Maybe I’m wrong, but that’s how I picked it up, as if you’re being more pessimistic towards Christianity than Islam. Anyway, moving on to my next point…
So what you’re trying to tell me is that Islam is actually a religion of peace that has been hijacked by a tiny minority of extremists? This is the grand-daddy of all the PC myths regarding Islam. Yet its persistence and resilience in the face of mountains of evidence to the contrary, both from Islamic theology and today’s newspapers, it is not simply due to naïve multiculturalism and cynical duplicity. Even the Muslim Brotherhood theorist Sayyid Qutb, one of the twentieth century’s foremost advocates of violent Jihad, taught (without a trace of irony) that Islam is a religion of peace. However, he had a very specific kind of peace in mind: “When Islam strives for peace, its objective is not that superficial peace which requires that only that part of the earth where the followers of Islam are residing remain secure. The peace which Islam desires is that the religion (i.e. the law of the society) be purified for God, that the obedience of all people be for God alone, and that some people should not be lords over others. After the period of the Prophet – peace be on him – only the final stages of the movement of Jihad are to be followed; the initial or middle stages are not applicable.
In other words, Islam is a religion of peace that will come when everyone is Muslim or at least subject to Islamic state. And to establish that peace, Muslims must wage war.

[Gantidge]

Nnnnnah see I don't think we will. I think we're gonna hold up multiculturalism for quite a while, as it's such a good thing.

A good thing? I fail to see that point. Tell me, in what way, has it been good for you or anyone else in these lands?

Broadening depth of society? Wider learning experience from difference cultures? Assuming that you don't just like classical music, which did originate in Europe, then the music you listen to has come from across different cultures. The same goes for art, drama, sports etc. I for one like to be able to share in another's culture, as to do so is to further enrich one's learning experience of the world. We are all humans and we should understand how others live.

Allow me to shed some light on this matter as you seem to be rather ill-informed....and then thee groups give them the opportunity.

You make strong points I admitt to that, however what you say at the beginning can be interpretted in different ways. To say Islam is a religion of peace or not can mean different things. When you say Islam, I'm presuming that you take the word to basically mean the Qur'an. I take it to mean anyone who believes in it as well, and all the different interpretations, violent or not. In the same way with Xianity. Maybe the Bible does preach less violence, and maybe overall appears less vioent than Islam. But I am not trying to prove Islam is a religion of violence; merely trying to drive the point home that any religion whose roots extend so far back in time will have passages that we would today hold to be barbaric and will come across as violent, ie. for Islam to be seen as vioent, then so should Judaism and Xianity.

His last name is Christ. Y'know, Jesus Christ?

That really is quite a fatal mistake. His last name wasn't Christ; that was a name given to him, because he was 'the annointed one'. If it was his last name, then both his parents would surely have that name as well. But they weren't called Mary and Joseph Christ. In the same way Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi 's first name wasn't Mahatma, as that was merely a title bestowed upon him by his followers meaning "Great Soul".

No. Racism is a form of discrimination based on race, and race alone. I quote Wikipedia: According to the Oxford English Dictionary, racism is a belief or ideology that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially to distinguish it as being either superior or inferior to another race or races.

I know that. The clue's in the name. But I'm simply telling you that people misuse words all the time. The term racist has come to basically mean, as I said, hatred towards another group of people. I know this is incorrect But it is a large phallacy of democracy that many people use. In the same way that people misuse the word 'gay' or don't realise that 'aweful' actually means 'full of awe' ie. in wonder, rather than terrible.

Illegal? Explain, please…

Since you said please, I'd be happy to. 

What I actually said was:

people are going to be angry when you come close to doing something almost illegal.

An Act of Parliament was stricken down in 2006 that attempted to follow up the 2005 Anti-Racism Act. Some people, many Muslims, complained that Jews ans Sikhs were covered by this act as they were strictly a race as well as a religion, even though they are not really seen as this by today's standards any more. So the Government attempted to pass this Anti-Religion Act in 2006 which gave extra cover to some religions. But this was stopped because challenging race is not something that is made out of choice, you are born into a race and can't change. Religion is a belief, and so it is acceptable to challenge it, as you are so rightly proving. However, had the act been passed, what you are doing would still not be illegal, but is starting to get towards the edge of that distinction. Thus, you are coming close to doing something that was almost illegal.

Maybe I’m wrong, but that’s how I picked it up, as if you’re being more pessimistic towards Christianity than Islam. Anyway, moving on to my next point…

I only have experience to work from, and personally, I know more Christians that would be deemed dangerous by society that Muslims. Now maybe that's because I don't know that many Muslims, but that's the only experience I have.

So what you’re trying to tell me is that Islam is actually a religion of peace that has been hijacked by a tiny minority of extremists?

I mean that "a tiny minority of extremists" have used Islam as a cover for their attacks on the West. However, even if they are drawing their power and confidence from genuine scripture of the Qur'an, most Muslims are not that fanatical; they wouldn't die in a car bomb for their faith, as they disapprove of how their religion has been branded by people like you as a Religion of Violence.