banning may or may not be part of a local problem

Submitted by sincereefforts (United States), Aug 30, 2007 at 21:17

I think Dr Pipes you gave one argument that goes a bit against your own conclusion. We can not take a broad approach of banning or not banning Islam. Now this includes even "not banning"; there may be a locality or a country that may require banning of Islam or muslims as a perfect solution to their situation. In fact India was divided as a result of such a solution but the solution was given by muslims themselves and unfortunately India was still left with 150 million muslims (so it was not implemented properly).

It is not wise to say that Islam is not bad but muslims are bad. Islam is the breeding ground of hateful idologies. Kuran lacks wise thoughts. The ideology of Islam lacks wisdom. You can convert 1 million budhdhists into muslims and see what ideologies they will develop. Two things are guranteed, their sense of reasoning will be seriously compromised and their idea about human values will become very poor (because Kuran has 7th century tribal human values, suitable for people who can hardly think).

Muslims are not bad, they are humans as everybody else is, it is Islam that makes most of them foolish.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".