Radicals of any ideology are products of ignorance...Think for yourselves.

Submitted by Jes (United States), Dec 8, 2008 at 16:07

Just consider this. As a student of history....It would benefit to look back on Islam to any point in time...there has always been aggression from people under the influence of that religion ever since its creation. The koran...all you have to do is read it. It is violent and speaks of punishment for anyone who poses a threat and does not believe. (Yes, I will say it for anyone who decides to counter with this...the Bible also has violence in it..but not to those who do not believe...but those who commit crimes against others...like stealing, murder, sexual abuse..ect)

A COMPLETELY Different topic of conversation..but there are those who would comment on just the "similarity" of those books. Yes, there has also been aggression from countering "Christian" beliefs, but in the defense of every belief, there are radicals on EVERY side. The only thing that matters is where the AVERAGE HUMAN BEING lets the belief lead them. It is, in my opinion, WRONG for ANYONE to let an ideology, belief, religion, dream, goal, plan, whatever it happens to be...convince them that someone is wrong enough to die as a consequence for NOT agreeing with them. Any radical belief from any faction, religion, ideology...ect. is wrong if it leads to the mistreatment of another human being. Period.

Whether or not Christianity and Islam (or whatever religion is being scrutinized) were killing off people who did not share the same beliefs as themselves centuries ago is not an issue now. There were different methods of justice then...and at some point in time there needs to be a revision of a belief to mesh with the changing times. Not necessarily a loss of beliefs of convictions...but certainly a change in how a group behaves. Just like methods of punishment changed from horrible torture to jail time.

there needs to be a change in how religion treats those who disagree. Now more than ever there is a call to embrace "human rights" and the beliefs of others...but why is it so hard to call on an ideology such as Islam to "mellow out" so to speak and be tolerant of the ways of the "west." Why is the behavior of the radicals "protected" or justified...just because they are not the majority...and not everyone thinks that way..and not every one in that religion is weak minded and easily swayed by the promise of virgins in heaven.

The religion is still violent...the proof is how they treat people of other sects of the islamic religion...they fight and try to kill each other off...for those of you who need proof...the shi'ites and sunnis in Iraq....this is the 21st century and they can't even be tolerant of those in their SAME religion...why would we expect tolerant behavior from them towards our entire culture that is not even related to them..or under the guise of Islam! If the "west" were to react and respond with terrorism at every opportunity that was given...as some people believe they should....there would be chaos at ever corner of the globe....not like there is not already, they would be condemned as warmongers..not like they aren't already...and they would just be defending against a group of people who just do not agree. ...They just don't agree.

Why do people have to die just because they are not muslim? Why? The only reason the west wants to "suppress" the radicals....is because there is no reason why we shouldn't defend ourselves against hate...because according to their "beliefs" they have every right to rid the world of infidels and people who don't believe.. Every action causes a reaction...Islam specifically Islamism SHOULD expect a reaction to violence...AND hate.

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".