Islam

[DH]

Can anybody recommend a good translation/edition of the Koran for a lay person to read? Also, can you recommend a good, basic "Introduction to Islam" sort of book? With all that's going on in the world today, I'd like to gain at least a basic, but accurate, understanding of what it's all about.

Thanks!

[LeSellers]

With all that's going on in the world today, I'd like to gain at least a basic, but accurate, understanding of what it's all about.

Are you perhaps referring to the Oslo bombing?

Sorry about not having a suggestion for the books.

Lehi

Edited July 22, 2011 by LeSellers

[BCSpace]

Qur'an

This one has three translations side by side for easy comparison. Yusuf-Ali, Pickthal, and Shakir.

[DH]

Are you perhaps referring to the Oslo bombing?

Perhaps I should have said "these days," instead of "today." Didn't mean to be that specific. As far I know, they haven't determined who's responsible for the bombing in Norway, or if it's connected to the shooting. But yes, with Muslim extremists being tied to so many acts of terrorism, one has to wonder.

I hear some people claim that Islam is inherently violent. Others say it's a religion of peace, and that only a relatively small number twist its meaning and become terrorists. I just don't know, one way or the other. But it does occur to me that similar arguments (both ways) could be made about Christianity, so I hesitate to make a snap judgment about Islam.

[DH]

Qur'an

This one has three translations side by side for easy comparison. Yusuf-Ali, Pickthal, and Shakir.

Thanks!

[LeSellers]

As far I know, they haven't determined who's responsible for the bombing in Norway, or if it's connected to the shooting. But yes, with Muslim extremists being tied to so many acts of terrorism, one has to wonder.

With seven dead in the capital and another 50 30 (per updated report) in the Utøya youth camp, it's a huge catastrophe for Norway, worst since WWII.

Ansar al-Jihad al-Alami, or "Helpers of the Global Jihad" has claimed responsibility. 'Course a bunch of idiots would claim responsibility for an atrocity they did not commit, so one is left wondering, as you say.

At least in Olso, the leader of the Islamic community is condemning the act, unlike what happened in USmerica following the World Trade Center bombing and airliner attack and the attack on the Pentagon.

I am with Herman Cain here: I couldn't trust a Muslim, no matter his race, without extensive background checks, and, even then, ...

Lehi

Edited July 22, 2011 by LeSellers

[Kevin Christensen]

Daniel Peterson, whose name is not unknown in these parts, wrote a well-regarded biography of Muhammad.

http://www.amazon.com/Muhammad-Prophet-God-Daniel-Peterson/dp/0802807542/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1311365827&sr=1-1

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[kolipoki09]

I am with Herman Cain here: I couldn't trust a Muslim, no matter his race, without extensive background checks, and, even then, ...

Lehi

I respect your right to share your opinion, but honestly Lehi, I expect much better from you.

Just as we wouldn't want the behavior of people like Brian David Mitchell, Mark Hofmann, and Warren Jeffs to taint the views of others about a faith we value and cherish, so it is with the overwhelming majority of Muslims, who want nothing to do with extremists.

[LeSellers]

I respect your right to share your opinion, but honestly Lehi, I expect much better from you.

Just as we wouldn't want the behavior of people like Brian David Mitchell, Mark Hofmann, and Warren Jeffs to taint the views of others about a faith we value and cherish, so it is with the overwhelming majority of Muslims, who want nothing to do with extremists.

You have three (and two are not LDS) out of millions. Hoffman, the one nominal "Mormon", didn't claim he was doing his evil in the name of God; in fact, he was rebelling against His church.

There are tens of millions of a billion or so who act in the name of their faith to destroy the rest of the world. They are not rebels against Islam—they claim to be acting in support of their religion. Those who harbor them do so from fear, perhaps (which makes it all the worse in my view), or out of active support. There are few, very few, who condemn these atrocities. Even the "peaceful" Muslims around the world desire the same goal the terrorists seek; they are just not actively pushing the agenda.

There is no history of Saints lying to gain the trust of our enemies and then destroying them. (Please take Mountain Meadows and stuff it, 'cause it don't fit the Muslim model, either.) We have never attacked innocents without any warning or provocation. The murderers who attacked on Friday had no connection, as far as we can tell, with those who died and were injured, and these posed no threat, imminent or distant, to their attackers. It is not our practice to "lie for Jesus", and we have no tradition of denying our faith, even in the face of death, and then retaliating with lethal force.

We Saints would not tolerate anyone who hid amongst us doing anything like this and claiming it was in the name of God.

If I had a company and a Muslim applied for a job, I'd spend a lot more time scrutinizing him than I would an atheist or anyone else. I simply couldn’t trust him to be telling the truth, and I could not trust him to reject killing me, an infidel, over some perceived slight against his prophet or religion.

My dealings with Muslims have been both extensive and superficial, but my impression is that too many of them are committed to violent jihad, and there is no way to tell the difference between these and those who are "moderate" Muslims. We have many examples in the civilian world of Muslims in USmerica who have killed other Muslims (including their daughters and other family members), not to mention 3,000 "others" a decade ago, but even more worrisome are the many cases of military members of the Muslim faith(s) who have killed the "brethren-in-arms" with hand grenades, pistols and rifles. There's one, a doctor who, presumably took the Hippocratic Oath, who killed a pregnant mother along with her baby and seven others on an Army Fort not all that long ago.

Tell me, please, how anyone who knows these facts can be expected to treat Muslims just as he would people who do not carry this baggage (whether they like it or not)? It is not rational, and it is not even possible.

The Sunday following 2001 09 11, I taught my Primary class that Islam is a "religion of peace". I had taken a pair of college classes on the Middle East, and Islam was a central piece of the curriculum. I had a good view of Islam, even though I disagreed with its tenets. It took a lot, I assure you, to move me from that position. But ten years of consistent destruction have succeeded. There is noting I can imagine that would change my current view of Mohamed and his disciples.

The two, our LDS faith and their Muslim one, are not even remotely parallel in this kind of thing.

Lehi

[sethpayne]

I respect your right to share your opinion, but honestly Lehi, I expect much better from you.

Just as we wouldn't want the behavior of people like Brian David Mitchell, Mark Hofmann, and Warren Jeffs to taint the views of others about a faith we value and cherish, so it is with the overwhelming majority of Muslims, who want nothing to do with extremists.

+1

[sethpayne]

We Saints would not tolerate anyone who hid amongst us doing anything like this and claiming it was in the name of God.

Danites, perhaps?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Daniel Peterson, whose name is not unknown in these parts, wrote a well-regarded biography of Muhammad.

http://www.amazon.com/Muhammad-Prophet-God-Daniel-Peterson/dp/0802807542/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1311365827&sr=1-1

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

Just reading the reviews makes me want to get the book.

[kolipoki09]

You have three (and two are not LDS) out of millions. Hoffman, the one nominal "Mormon", didn't claim he was doing his evil in the name of God; in fact, he was rebelling against His church.

Mitchell served as a temple worker in Salt Lake prior to his excommunication (shortly before he kidnapped Elizabeth Smart). Hofmann was excommunicated in lieu of the 1985 bombings. I never claimed Jeffs was a member of the LDS Church. However, all three have cultural ties to Mormonism, just as Al Qaeda has cultural ties to Islam. Within Islam (as in Mormonism), there are many sects.

There are tens of millions of a billion or so who act in the name of their faith to destroy the rest of the world. They are not rebels against Islam—they claim to be acting in support of their religion. Those who harbor them do so from fear, perhaps (which makes it all the worse in my view), or out of active support. There are few, very few, who condemn these atrocities. Even the "peaceful" Muslims around the world desire the same goal the terrorists seek; they are just not actively pushing the agenda.

Glenn Beck recently claimed the number was 157 million. After being decimated for fabricating a statistic out of thin air, he changed that number to 1.1 million (a number he considered 'enough to wipe us off the face of the earth'). Why are we still fighting 400 or so Al Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan? Of course, if being a terrorist means harboring feelings of ill will toward the American government, that would account for some 60+ million Americans alone. Methinks you define the term "terrorist" far too broadly. Even if we were to take Beck on his latter estimate, it would still put the total terrorist population at 0.0007 percent of the total Muslim population (or the proportional equivalent of about three LDS stakes).

There is no history of Saints lying to gain the trust of our enemies and then destroying them. (Please take Mountain Meadows and stuff it, 'cause it don't fit the Muslim model, either.) We have never attacked innocents without any warning or provocation. The murderers who attacked on Friday had no connection, as far as we can tell, with those who died and were injured, and these posed no threat, imminent or distant, to their attackers. It is not our practice to "lie for Jesus", and we have no tradition of denying our faith, even in the face of death, and then retaliating with lethal force.

The overwhelming majority of Muslims don't either.

We Saints would not tolerate anyone who hid amongst us doing anything like this and claiming it was in the name of God.

Interestingly enough, the overwhelming majority of Muslims from nearly all sects feel the same way.

To name a few of literally thousands:

http://www.m-a-t.org/

http://kurzman.unc.edu/islamic-statements-against-terrorism/

http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php

http://www.cair.com/americanmuslims/antiterrorism.aspx

http://www.islamfortoday.com/terrorism.htm

If I had a company and a Muslim applied for a job, I'd spend a lot more time scrutinizing him than I would an atheist or anyone else. I simply couldn’t trust him to be telling the truth, and I could not trust him to reject killing me, an infidel, over some perceived slight against his prophet or religion.

http://newsroom.lds.org/article/muslims-and-mormons-work-together-to-rush-aid-to-indonesia-quake-victims

http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/religion.cfm

Tell me, please, how anyone who knows these facts can be expected to treat Muslims just as he would people who do not carry this baggage (whether they like it or not)? It is not rational, and it is not even possible.

-------------

The two, our LDS faith and their Muslim one, are not even remotely parallel in this kind of thing.

"This kind of thing" has to do with being painted by too broad of a brush. My problem isn't with Islam. It's with terrorism in and of itself. That a small number of Muslims twist and use Islam to justify violence is unfortunate and shameful. If a Latter-day Saint or a group with roots stemming from the Restoration were to resort to violence in the name of Christ and the Restored Gospel, I would openly condemn it, just as the overwhelming majority of Muslims do today regarding Radical Fundamentalist Islam.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Glenn Beck recently claimed the number was 157 million. After being decimated for fabricating a statistic out of thin air, he changed that number to 1.1 million (a number he considered 'enough to wipe us off the face of the earth').

CFR please. I don't recall him ever saying there was 157 million or 1.1 million in definitive terms. What he did state and he did go from both a conservative perspective and a liberal perspective is claim that 5%-15% have been radicalized. And that 5%-15% was not his numbers but that of the pundits.

Probably not a good idea to brink Glenn up any way so don't worry about the CFR.

Edited July 22, 2011 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[kolipoki09]

Just reading the reviews makes me want to get the book.

It's well worth the time and a surprisingly quick read. Peterson incorporates a lot of Arabic terminology that can be a bit hard to follow at times if you don't keep track of characters and place names encyclopedically. It helped me to jot down a few things I was having trouble keeping track of, as well as the definitions of certain Arabic words that reappear throughout the text. No rush!

[kolipoki09]

CFR please. I don't recall him ever saying there was 157 million or 1.1 million in definitive terms. What he did state and he did go from both a conservative perspective and a liberal perspective is claim that 5%-15% have been radicalized. And that 5%-15% was not his numbers but that of the pundits.

Probably not a good idea to brink Glenn up any way so don't worry about the CFR.

Just for you Mola (and I won't address Glenn again). He did not say 157 million in definitive terms, though he claimed the number was 10 percent of the total population, which is 157 million.

His 1.1 million estimate was stated in definitive terms later.

[LeSellers]

Mitchell served as a temple worker in Salt Lake prior to his excommunication (shortly before he kidnapped Elizabeth Smart).

Exactly, he was excommunicated.

His/Their "cultural ties" to the Restoration mean nothing because he/they were in open rebellion against the very Church you pretend they were representing in their evil.

Next, we'll be hearing about the Danites. As if there were ever the slightest support for them among the leadership of the Church. Avard was a renegade from the beginning. He was denounced as soon as discovered.

The Islamists or whatever title they now carry are still recognized as Muslims by all Muslims.

all three have cultural ties to Mormonism, just as Al Qaeda has cultural ties to Islam. Within Islam (as in Mormonism), there are many sects.

Yet all these sects are "Islam". And, in spite of there being many sects of Islam, none of the leaders of any of them has arisen and denounced their acts.

Glenn Beck recently claimed the number was 157 million. After being decimated for fabricating a statistic out of thin air, he changed that number to 1.1 million (a number he considered 'enough to wipe us off the face of the earth').

Indeed, a million ill-willed people could wipe the rest of us off the face of the earth when another billion would not lift a finger against them.

And who brought up Brother Beck? 'Twasn't I.

From Palestinians (who are pretty well united in fighting against Israel, and number well over 4 million, and who hold USmerica in hatred, al quaeda and the Taliban, and dozens of other lesser known groups (including the "Helpers" in Norway), getting above the tens of millions is not a stretch at all.

Why are we still fighting 400 or so Al Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan?

"Operatives" is not the number we need to worry about. The real number is far higher, because those 400 (a number dragged out of the air, as far as I have seen) are supported by thousands of others. In a formal military situation, the traditional ratio is 1:7 "tooth-to-tail".

Methinks you define the term "terrorist" far too broadly.

A terrorist is one who actively fights using terror as a weapon or who supports those who do.

Even if we were to take Beck on his latter estimate, it would still put the total terrorist population at 0.0007 percent of the total Muslim population (or the proportional equivalent of about three LDS stakes).

Which is several hundred times the ratio of your three (none of whom claimed he was a Saint fighting the war of God).

The overwhelming majority of Muslims don't either.

But they are not doing anything about it, are they?

Interestingly enough, the overwhelming majority of Muslims from nearly all sects feel the same way.

Words are cheap.

My problem isn't with Islam. It's with terrorism in and of itself.

Okeh, what's the ratio of Muslim terrorists compared to all terrorists today? In XXI, it is effectively true that terrorism is a Muslim enterprise.

That a small number of Muslims twist and use Islam to justify violence is unfortunate and shameful.

Their small relative numbers (and a million is still a very large number) is not the point.

If a Latter-day Saint or a group with roots stemming from the Restoration were to resort to violence in the name of Christ and the Restored Gospel, I would openly condemn it, just as the overwhelming majority of Muslims do today regarding Radical Fundamentalist Islam.

But they are not "openly condemn[ing] it". They are silent, at best. Many, while not participating actively in the battle, are supporting the jihadists.

And, your hypothetical Restorationists do not exist. The "Radical Fundamentalist Islam[ists]" do, and they are many.

If Islam, as a religious tradition wished to shed its terrorist label, it could do so in a single day: the issuance of a thousand fatwahs calling for the destruction of terrorists organizations, and declaring terrorists apostates and infidels wold accomplish the label shedding, and would also effectively end the terror. I am not holding my breath, 'cause it will not happen.

Lehi

Le Sellars has left the building.

Edited July 23, 2011 by Minos
thread ban

[Jeff K.]

Islam is alot like the baptist church. Not in doctrine but in structure. They have no centralized doctrinal point from which they can resolve differences. Indeed people often go "fatwah" shopping in order to find the response they are looking for. In the 1850's, baptists were split between those who opposed slavery, and those in the south who endorsed it. The Conventions in the 1840's took a limited and allowable view of slavery in which slave holders could hold office. It wasn't until a hundred and fifty years or so later that the Baptist church in some sort of universal agreement condemned what happend, and expressed repentance for it. Who knows, perhaps in 150 years Islamic groups will do the same.

[kolipoki09]

Exactly, he was excommunicated.

His/Their "cultural ties" to the Restoration mean nothing because he/they were in open rebellion against the very Church you pretend they were representing in their evil.

Next, we'll be hearing about the Danites. As if there were ever the slightest support for them among the leadership of the Church. Avard was a renegade from the beginning. He was denounced as soon as discovered.

The Islamists or whatever title they now carry are still recognized as Muslims by all Muslims.

Incidentally, Muslims tend to have no problem denouncing one another as apostates and therefore not "true" followers of Islam. This is one of the many reasons why the Saudi government severed ties with Osama Bin Laden.

Once again, I never claimed Mitchell and Hofmann represented the Church, I only acknowledged their cultural connection to it. Mitchell openly opposed the Church because he (like several other fundamentalists) believes that the LDS Church (not himself) is in apostasy. You remember the old adage from Ronald Reagan: “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party. The party left me.” Mitchell views the LDS Church in much of the same light. "I didn't leave the LDS Church. The LDS Church left me."

The same goes for many fundamentalist adherents of Islam who loathe moderate Muslims. I've provided several links from hundreds of Muslim leaders openly opposing terrorism and denouncing such acts as apostate in nature. Please, reread my post.

Yet all these sects are "Islam". And, in spite of there being many sects of Islam, none of the leaders of any of them has arisen and denounced their acts.

Indeed, a million ill-willed people could wipe the rest of us off the face of the earth when another billion would not lift a finger against them.

You seem to forget that WASP males aren't the only ones fighting terrorism. Forget the 160,000+ troops (nearly all of whom are Muslims) fighting the Taliban in the Afghan National Army. Forget the 700,000+ soldiers of the Iraqi Army (another military unit made up almost exclusively of Muslims) currently conducting counter-insurgency operations alongside American and British military teams. I've provided hundreds of quotes from Muslim leaders denouncing Al Qaeda and others. Don't call me out on ignorance for something you've refused to read.

From Palestinians (who are pretty well united in fighting against Israel, and number well over 4 million, and who hold USmerica in hatred, al quaeda and the Taliban, and dozens of other lesser known groups (including the "Helpers" in Norway), getting above the tens of millions is not a stretch at all.

"Operatives" is not the number we need to worry about. The real number is far higher, because those 400 (a number dragged out of the air, as far as I have seen) are supported by thousands of others. In a formal military situation, the traditional ratio is 1:7 "tooth-to-tail".

A terrorist is one who actively fights using terror as a weapon or who supports those who do.

Which is several hundred times the ratio of your three (none of whom claimed he was a Saint fighting the war of God).

Do all Palestinians hate America or Israel, or are there Palestinians who want peace and feel they can coexist with Jews and Christians in the Holy Land? Several Mormon Fundamentalists believe they're fighting in a holy war as well and have justified their violence (whether it's assassinating competing "prophets," blowing up LDS chapels, or beheading in-laws because they claim God told them to).

Like I've said before, the overwhelming majority of Muslims do not support terrorism.

But they are not doing anything about it, are they?

Words are cheap.

Okeh, what's the ratio of Muslim terrorists compared to all terrorists today? In XXI, it is effectively true that terrorism is a Muslim enterprise.

Their small relative numbers (and a million is still a very large number) is not the point.

But they are not "openly condemn[ing] it". They are silent, at best. Many, while not participating actively in the battle, are supporting the jihadists.

And, your hypothetical Restorationists do not exist. The "Radical Fundamentalist Islam[ists]" do, and they are many.

If Islam, as a religious tradition wished to shed its terrorist label, it could do so in a single day: the issuance of a thousand fatwahs calling for the destruction of terrorists organizations, and declaring terrorists apostates and infidels wold accomplish the label shedding, and would also effectively end the terror. I am not holding my breath, 'cause it will not happen.

Lehi

Le Sellars has left the building.

Muslims from around the world have united in efforts to fight terrorism, corruption, and gross abuses of power. Terrorism is not unique to Islam. There are terrorists and those willing to "die for the cause" in almost every faith. They openly condemn it. They actively fight against it. I have high hopes for Islam, and while I am a happy, practicing member of the LDS Church, I hope my fellow Church members can exercise convicted civility toward those of other faiths, seek to understand and tolerate them, and promote legislation that protects the freedom to worship how, where, or what they may.

[altersteve]

I am with Herman Cain here: I couldn't trust a Muslim, no matter his race, without extensive background checks, and, even then, ...

Lehi

I have to be honest here. I'm very saddened to see a member of the Church of Jesus Christ say something like this.

[TAO]

Lehi, you need to meet my friend Momen.

I can assure you you would not in any reasonable way think he is involved in any sort of terrorist anything. You would think quite the opposite.

You need to meet some awesome Muslims, my friend. They will change your opinion about Islam, I assure you.

BTW... have you read Kite Runner... there are some graphic parts in it... but it does show you how some American Muslims view the terrorists. They do not like 'em... at all. Trust me, my friend... they are not as you think they are =P.

Calming Wishes,

TAO

Edited July 23, 2011 by TAO

[bluebell]

Lehi, you need to meet my friend Momen.

I can assure you you would not in any reasonable way think he is involved in any sort of terrorist anything. You would think quite the opposite.

You need to meet some awesome Muslims, my friend. They will change your opinion about Islam, I assure you.

BTW... have you read Kite Runner... there are some graphic parts in it... but it does show you how some American Muslims view the terrorists. They do not like 'em... at all. Trust me, my friend... they are not as you think they are =P.

Calming Wishes,

TAO

One of the most Christ-like people i've ever met was a Muslim man I met on my mission.

As an aside since Lehi brought it up-the man who committed the heinous crimes in Oslo does not appear to be Muslim and, as the news said, appeared to have anti-muslim leanings and political gripes.

[volgadon]

From Palestinians (who are pretty well united in fighting against Israel, and number well over 4 million, and who hold USmerica in hatred, al quaeda and the Taliban, and dozens of other lesser known groups (including the "Helpers" in Norway), getting above the tens of millions is not a stretch at all.

Not quite so. A good deal of Palestinians openly hate and struggle against Israel, whilst others tolerate it to varying degrees, and a smaller ammount actively support it. To say that they are "pretty well united in fighting against Israel" is overly simplistic. Most Druze and Bedouins in Israel serve in the Israeli armed forces and police, as do a large amount of Christians. I've had Palestinian army mates and coworkers, some were jerks, some were great, some you couldn't trust an inch, others you could entrust your life to, they are just like any set of people in the world. Bad apples, hearts of gold, and all varieties in between.

[Questing Beast]

...

Just as we wouldn't want the behavior of people like Brian David Mitchell, Mark Hofmann, and Warren Jeffs to taint the views of others about a faith we value and cherish, so it is with the overwhelming majority of Muslims, who want nothing to do with extremists.

Just because a great majority of members of a dogmatic, exclusive faith rise above the inherent bigotry of their scriptures and traditions does not mean that said-religions are to be dismissed as harmless.

Mormonism produced the Mountain Meadows Massacre. And plenty of rumor about blindly following the prophet follows Mormons into politics. Catholicism in recent times has been a source of worry to many Protestants. Islam historically, and recently before this latest era of extremism, has always produced fanatics that threaten non Muslims with violence. Therefore, as practiced historically, Islam is not a religion of "peace". It is a dangerous and violent religion. So is Christianity. So is Mormonism. So is Judaism. So is any religion that sees the world with an "us and them" perspective, combined with an adopted mandate to spread the faith: believing that "God" has willed it, and even required the subjugation and death of unbelievers....

[Storm Rider]

You have three (and two are not LDS) out of millions. Hoffman, the one nominal "Mormon", didn't claim he was doing his evil in the name of God; in fact, he was rebelling against His church.

There are tens of millions of a billion or so who act in the name of their faith to destroy the rest of the world. They are not rebels against Islam—they claim to be acting in support of their religion. Those who harbor them do so from fear, perhaps (which makes it all the worse in my view), or out of active support. There are few, very few, who condemn these atrocities. Even the "peaceful" Muslims around the world desire the same goal the terrorists seek; they are just not actively pushing the agenda.

There is no history of Saints lying to gain the trust of our enemies and then destroying them. (Please take Mountain Meadows and stuff it, 'cause it don't fit the Muslim model, either.) We have never attacked innocents without any warning or provocation. The murderers who attacked on Friday had no connection, as far as we can tell, with those who died and were injured, and these posed no threat, imminent or distant, to their attackers. It is not our practice to "lie for Jesus", and we have no tradition of denying our faith, even in the face of death, and then retaliating with lethal force.

We Saints would not tolerate anyone who hid amongst us doing anything like this and claiming it was in the name of God.

If I had a company and a Muslim applied for a job, I'd spend a lot more time scrutinizing him than I would an atheist or anyone else. I simply could’t trust him to be telling the truth, and I could not trust him to reject killing me, an infidel, over some perceived slight against his prophet or religion.

My dealings with Muslims have been both extensive and superficial, but my impression is that too many of them are committed to violent jihad, and there is no way to tell the difference between these and those who are "moderate" Muslims. We have many examples in the civilian world of Muslims in USmerica who have killed other Muslims (including their daughters and other family members), not to mention 3,000 "others" a decade ago, but even more worrisome are the many cases of military members of the Muslim faith(s) who have killed the "brethren-in-arms" with hand grenades, pistols and rifles. There's one, a doctor who, presumably took the Hippocratic Oath, who killed a pregnant mother along with her baby and seven others on an Army Fort not all that long ago.

Tell me, please, how anyone who knows these facts can be expected to treat Muslims just as he would people who do not carry this baggage (whether they like it or not)? It is not rational, and it is not even possible.

The Sunday following 2001 09 11, I taught my Primary class that Islam is a "religion of peace". I had taken a pair of college classes on the Middle East, and Islam was a central piece of the curriculum. I had a good view of Islam, even though I disagreed with its tenets. It took a lot, I assure you, to move me from that position. But ten years of consistent destruction have succeeded. There is noting I can imagine that would change my current view of Mohamed and his disciples.

The two, our LDS faith and their Muslim one, are not even remotely parallel in this kind of thing.

Lehi

Unfortunately, you are in a very poor position having such thoughts about a group of our brothers and sisters. Having an intimate knowledge of many, many Muslims I can tell you that you speak from complete ignorance. As a LDS I would feel more than comfortable hiring a Muslim. Yes, there is a small minority of Muslims that follow a twisted, evil interpretation of Islam, but in the history of Christianity we have seen several Christian groups rationalize similar atrocities and beliefs. Man is capable of doing all forms of evil in the name of God. Islam is no different than Christianity.