How would you rate your perception of Islam?

[More Than A Feeling]

Poll question: How would you rate your perception of Islam?

This is the fourth in a series of polls to measure the perceptions of the various beliefs and non-beliefs. 10 is the most positive, and 1 is the most negative.

The third poll can be found here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=214x117422

The second poll can be found here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=214&topic_id=115138

The first poll can be found here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.phpaz=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=113570&mesg_id=113570

[hobbit709]

1. I view all religions as equally silly

[uppityperson]

2. Again

Rate it for what purpose?

Need for a belief? Rules to live by? How it is applied? How it is interpreted? When? Too many factors to be this simplistic. Thank you anyways.Again

[Meshuga]

6. I think the poll is supposed to be...

...taken as "in general". What is the overall perception.

[damntexdem]

3. I voted low-to-middle (5), ...

like I would for any major religion.

[Adelante]

4. Difficult to rate for me

I have a very positive view of Islam in itself, as far as religions go. It's the fundamentalist versions that support barbarisms such as "Honor" killings of women I deplore.

[durrrty libby]

5. I have come to the conclusion, that in general, religions

do more harm than good

[saltpoint]

7. 'Went with a '6' on this one.

There are non-extremist adherents to Islam who are thoughtful, sincere, and genuine in their studies and practices. I have no quarrel with that, even if it's a long way from my own upbringing and current perception.

The folks who call for Salmon Rushdie's head, or who fly into a rage over Danish cartoons -- well, that drags the number down. Way down. I don't think Rushdie is the most gifted writer ever, but to call for his death because he pisses someone off is absurdly cruel and anti-intellectual.

The Crusades sucked. Perhaps it seemed like a good idea at the time among the Christian West, but the results overall were horrifying. Memories are long. Many of our current difficulties in the Middle East have their roots in long-held memories of those military assaults. There is intellect and beauty in Eastern cultures, and the West is often stingy in recognizing it.

Give me the anonymous, humble Islamic woman or man living in The Seychelles who aspire of their own accord and resources to live a good life. No quarrel with these folks at all.

[Boojatta]

9. When and how did the areas of interest to the Crusaders become Muslim?

The Crusades sucked. Perhaps it seemed like a good idea at the time among the Christian West, but the results overall were horrifying. Memories are long. Many of our current difficulties in the Middle East have their roots in long-held memories of those military assaults.

There are Muslim countries today that do not permit missionary activity by non-Muslims. Did Christians oppose the enforcement of analogous rules against missionary activities by non-Christians? Did Christians try to enforce such rules but fail to enforce them? Was Islam established by means of military assaults in precisely those areas where Crusaders later themselves launched military assaults?

Of course, memories are not as long as you suggest because lives are not that long. Reliance on history books or oral tradition carries the hazards of distortion and selective memory.

[saltpoint]

10. Boojatta, memories are indeed quite long. In the early moments of

Mr. Bush's Iraq war he made the profound mistake of referring to his mission as "a crusade."

He was pounced on for that, and properly so.

We are in fact students of history and we are in fact aware that many in Islam view Western meddling in the Middle East as "Crusade-like behavior."

[saltpoint]

11. Have you by chance read Karen Armstrong's book,

HOLY WAR: THE CRUSADES AND THEIR PMACT ON TODAY'S WORLD?

(Anchor books, 1988 / 2nd ed. Dec. 2001 / ISBN 0-385-72140-4)

I think you'd find Armstrong's contentions very persuasive.

I stand with her in re-asserting that the cultural memory of a people remembers from the times of the Crusades the unwelcome presence of invading, or occuyping, Western armies.

[saltpoint]

12. In 2003, this very contemporary reference speaks to the longevity

of memory among Muslims for Western intrusions:

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/04/11/1049567875704.html


One reason may be that the war in Iraq was never sanctioned by influential Christian leaders. Unlike Pope Urban II, for instance, who in the 11th century promised the remission of sins to everyone who took part in the Crusades against Muslims and a martyr's crown to any crusader who fell in battle, Pope John Paul II has steadfastly opposed military action against Iraq.

So, too, has the Archbishop of Canterbury and even senior members of President George Bush's United Methodist church.

Still, from a Muslim perspective, it is not hard to construe the US-led war in Iraq as a new religious crusade. Bush has invoked God's blessing on his decision to go to war, he is surrounded by advisers with strong links to the Christian right and the pro-Israel lobby, and his natural constituency is to be found in Bible-belt America.

As well, and courtesy of the many television networks that have been covering this war from the front virtually 24 hours a day, Muslims have been exposed to images of US troops attending Christian religious services during lulls in the fighting, in close proximity to some of the holiest sites in Islam.

Though innocent in themselves, those images will have played on the collective memory of Arabs in particular. The Crusades are almost forgotten in the West but not closer to the lands in which the fighting took place.

Anyone who doubts that need only recall the fanfare with which in 1987 Muslims in Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Iraq celebrated the 800th anniversary of the victory that led to the Muslim reconquest of Jerusalem, or consider the leading role Islamic groups have played in mass demonstrations against the war in the streets of Cairo, Damascus and Amman.

The historical conflict between Islam and the Christian West, in other words, is still a powerful rallying symbol among many Muslims. The fact that it didn't rally more of them to fight for Saddam does not necessarily mean they accept the argument that he posed a discrete problem to people everywhere irrespective of their religious beliefs.

========

Note particularly the paragraph:

"Though innocent in themselves, those images will have played on the collective memory of Arabs in particular. The Crusades are almost forgotten in the West but not closer to the lands in which the fighting took place."

--and consider that not only did the Crusades suck when they were King-ordered and Pope-sanctioned, but they suck now, under any new guise you wish, including Bush's assault on and occupation of Iraq.

[saltpoint]

13. History and oral tradition is what we have.

It's what we have available to us.

If you find anything other than what History and oral tradition have made available, you should give the Chairs of Humanities Departments the world over a call.

Absent that, they are owed more respect than you give them.

[saltpoint]

15. This piece is fairly short but you may find it of interest just the same.

The National Catholic Reporter is a progressive and hard-hitting bunch of folks.

This article gives a source for Bush's unfortunate "Crusades" comment and offers a contemporary framework for the problem such a remark triggers:

http://ncronline.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2001d/102601/102601a.htm

[saltpoint]

14. dupe

[Solo_in_MD]

8. Isalm is the worst amongest a less than stellar lot, and has not place in a civilized nation

[saltpoint]

16. In some areas of the country with significant Islamic populations,

there will be more and more interaction between Islamic kids and everyone else. I think that's a good thing, really. A very good thing.

Let a new generation of people interact and overcome some of the artificial cultural boundaries.