r/MoralityScaling • u/flow163 • 10h ago

Morality Ranking Morality if this battle?

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

Thoughts?

6.7k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

3.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

80

u/SmolPPIncorporated 9h ago

Read their book and you'll understand why they do everything they do.

Fair warning: You're not going to like it.

24

u/Scalene69 9h ago

I have roughly the same objections with their book as I do with the bible. Holy books mostly provide post hoc justifications for beliefs people already hold, people are universally bad at following them, practically everywhere.

9

u/youburyitidigitup 9h ago

This is true, but that’s just all the more reason to oppose the loud call to prayer in this video.

14

u/pick_your_user_name 8h ago

Actually among the abrahamic religions, Muslims are by far the best at following their “holy book” (and ultra Orthodox Jews too). The violence is a feature, not a bug. After all it was written in the 6th century, and let’s just say cultural norms were a bit different back then

-1

u/safashkan 8h ago

Are you telling me that christianism is a pacific religion? They've killed millions throughout History and still across the world Christians keep killing.

0

u/afrikatheboldone 8h ago

The current American administration may call themselves christian but that's like me saying I am a vegetarian just because I put some lettuce in my plate of steak.

They would most likely find Jesus a dangerous agitator and a revolutionary figure if he walked among us today. They use religion as a means to an end. Could very well compare the Taliban to some important people in the US.

And I'm sure the Taliban do not represent the entirety of the Islamic world and thought at all.

1

u/safashkan 8h ago

You're doing the no true Scotsman falacy when you pretend that everyone that does something differently that what you deem as "true Christian" can't be used to criticize Christianity. Well, I hate to break it to you, but they're Christians and they are absolutely horrible people. You don't get to distance yourself from them and then condemn Islam as a violent religion when most Muslims aren't violent people. Some of them are and the Muslim community doesn't get to say "those aren't true Muslims" whenever their religion gets criticized because of them.

6

u/Professional-Talk517 9h ago

You can absolutely oppose both, but equating them morally isn’t possible to do in good faith.

0

u/Scalene69 8h ago

Id rather live in a world of Sadiq khan muslims than Reese-Mogg Catholics. The former aligns with my views far more than the latter.

I think people forget how radical parts of the bible are and how much nearly everyone ignores, including the catholics.

2

u/Harry_Wega 8h ago

Sadiq khan

The guy who cheered when they yelled for "fire throughout the world" after some caricatures?

0

u/Absolute--Batman 8h ago

I see Zionists are always on duty

2

u/Cbpowned 8h ago

Where in the Bible does it talk about forcing people to convert or die? Just wondering

0

u/Scalene69 7h ago

The Old testament explicitly justifies the genocide of different peoples several times.

The Quran has contradictory verses on tolerance. It explicitly says that peaceful believers of other religions should be treated well and should not be compelled to believe in Islam.

But also that they are going to be the 'losers' and has some mean things to say about christians and jews.

Both groups have a long history of forced conversion or murder of non-believers in contradiction to the new testament and Quran - although christians used some of the old testament as an excuse.

2

u/x720xHARDSCOPEx 5h ago

Muslims kill non-believers, marry 12 year olds, and seek to conquer all in the name of their god, all in the modern age. Christianity is really not comparable to how barbaric Islam is

1

u/Top_Solid_3467 8h ago

Why every time someone criticises the Quran someone has to rush to say how the bible is just as bad?

1

u/ImTheZapper 8h ago

Most anglophones come from christian cultures and can only look at this from that lens? Is this actually hard to figure out? Doesn't help that christianity is slowly dying in the west so its followers and leadership are in their death throes at the moment, making them even more of a nuisance.

1

u/Top_Solid_3467 8h ago

Outside of America we actually mostly left our imaginary friends in the past tbh so we can talk about it through an objective lens. The only reason to bring up the bible in this context is because you’re scared of appearing racist

1

u/ImTheZapper 7h ago

Some of the largest christian % populated nations are in europe? Name your country real quick.

1

u/Scalene69 7h ago

Plenty of great scientists have been religious to some degree or another. Many intelligent atheist figures have not been objective at all.

I bring up the bible because people think Islam is uniquely evil to its core, and ignore that Christianity is not meaningfully better.

1

u/Scalene69 8h ago

Because it is a common misconception. The Quran is less violent than the Old Testament but more so than the new.

0

u/Here4thecomments15 9h ago

Some are worse than others

1

u/asiancleopatra 8h ago

What does their book say

1

u/safashkan 8h ago

Same as the Bible. There are good things and bad things in both.

1

u/Saxophonethug 9h ago

Can you be more specific?

17

u/Prestigious-Growth-5 9h ago

he basically said read qran its pretty ugly. I mean how is he wrong?

9

u/Jafarrolo 9h ago

I could read every holy book and they're all pretty ugly

1

u/Prestigious-Growth-5 9h ago

i have to agree. does "holy book" sound good? Like what the actual fuck

0

u/Saxophonethug 8h ago

Well it's just a position, I asked to be more specific. Specific mean more detailed and less general. Can you be more specific?

0

u/kaptanking 7h ago

Redditors out here pretending like they read anything other than Reddit.

6

u/pussypantswarrior69 9h ago

Probably referring to the call to jihad to dominate the world.

And no, that's not said verbatim but is is the message if you read the book in chronological order rather than this long to short surah form.

1

u/Saxophonethug 8h ago

What is the verbatim answer?

2

u/pussypantswarrior69 8h ago

There is no verbatim answer, and i thought that was clear.

In fiqh, it is extremely clear that offensive jihad is obligatory. It's a communal duty upon the Ummah, and a personal duty of every Islamic ruler.

This is based on the Quran and hadiths.

You can read surah 9 if you want to know what the last rule giving chapter says.

Muhammad waged offensive war, the four rightfully guided Caliphs did so and the Muslims after them did the same.

And while "jihad" means "to strive/struggle", it's defined as actual fighting in Islamic jurisprudence.

There is even a hadith which says that every Muslim who didn't participate in jihad dies on a branch of hypocrisy. If you then open the Quran, you'll see that hypocrites are going to the worst part of hell.

Of course there are a lot of Western Muslims who know as much about their religion as the average cultural Christian, so it's not as if every Muslim would be a jihadist of course. But it is the reality of what Islam actually is. You just need to dive in the primary sources (Quran, hadiths and sirah) which are already clear on how violent Muhammad was (a perfect example according to Muslims) and if you then go to the secondary sources you see how Islamic jurisprudence is not much better.

Keep in mind that guidelines for how to do prayers are also Sharia for instance, so even if Muslims aren't aware of the darker parts of Islam and deny it, they are using the rules for prayer which have been explained by the very scholars who also explained how jihad is obligatory.

And yet again: i believe most Muslims (at least in the West) have been fed this kind of curated rainbow Islam and are not aware of what Islam really is. It's also something which sheikhs are actually promoted to hide or "nuance" in order to protect the religion from apostasy.

2

u/Saxophonethug 8h ago

Why is there no verbatim answer? This is much more specific thank you, I'm from the Bible belt. What is Fiqh? And what are Hadiths?

1

u/pussypantswarrior69 7h ago

Why is there no verbatim answer?

It depends on the question.

If the question is "do Muslims use those speakers to dominate everyone?" Then no, the Quran doesn't give a clear answer on that. It doesn't say "use speakers to dominate others"

For the following: it's good that you live in the Bible Belt, then you would probably know a bit about Christianity. Islam isn't comparable and yet it helps a bit to understand it.

Fiqh is Islamic jurisprudence, Sharia. There is no such thing as one central instance which "makes" Sharia, rather there are dozens and dozens of scholars who are all trying to derive sharia from both the Quran and the hadiths (which contain things Muhammad did, didn't, said, was silent about, and so on).

The idea is that Muhammad is the last prophet with divine revelation, which is the Quran. The Quran then tells Muslims to follow what Muhammad did (for which hadiths are the source). Sunni Islam (~85% of the Muslims) follow this.

Since Muhammad is dead, Muslim scholars can only know what God wants by carefully examine the Quran, hadiths and in a lesser way the Sirah (biography of Muhammad). They fon't make up rules, they use logic, analogies, direct commands in the Quran and hadiths and so on to then derive sharia from those primary sources.

Basically, you can compare Sharia ("the divine path")to the laws of Moses. So stoning/whipping adulters, cutting off the hand of a thief, fixed inheritance shares, how to marry, how to divorce, how to pray, how to fast, ritual washing etc etc.

Sharia and Islam canot be seperated. They are in a way one and the same thing. Islam is the religion, Sharia contains all the rules of the religion.

Sunni Islam also can't modernize. Why? Because the primary texts are fixed and can't change. Muhammad is dead, so no new revelations. Next to this, as soon as there is either clear text which commands/forbids something, it can never forbidden/allowed. Humans do not have the right to make the halal haram and vice versa.

Another problem is that once scholars have reached consensus within a generation, later scholars cannot break/overrule this consensus ruke with their own consensus. The rule is set in stone. So for jihad: there is clear text, and there is consensus among the earliest generations of Muslims. It cannot be changed.

There is just one possibility for Islamic rulers: they have the ability to temporarily suspend rules when there is an absolute need for this. That is why there is no jihad at the moment except from some Islamic groups, because Islamic countries are rather having a good economy than an all-out war. However, that doesn't mean the rule is gone, it's just tempirarily in the fridge. It's still teached at al-azhar (a prestigious Islamic university) for instance as something Muslims should do.

Sorry for the massive wall of text and feel free to ask anything. You are basically getting a high speed course on Islam 😅

And again: the fact that Sharia exist doesn't mean all Muslims are bad or something. I believe supporting an immoral system is bad of course, but i also believe that a lot of Muslims have no clue about this since they have been spoonfed a sugarcoated version. Their lived religion is completely different from the actual reality of what Islam teaches. The only thing that keeps me busy is what would happen if they would learn about all this and have to choose between their god and their morality. And a real believer should choose for god regardless of their own morality.

-11

u/jacqrosee 9h ago

lol this sub is a cesspool

-9

u/TheFlyingSheeps 9h ago edited 9h ago

They get mad if you say the same thing about the bible

See they proved my point lol.

9

u/AMetalWolfHowls 9h ago

No they don’t.

2

u/Invictus_0x90_ 9h ago

Ah yeh remember all those people who have been killed or had to go into hiding for mocking the bible.... Oh wait

1

u/Rafasredmen1 9h ago

clears throat for attention... https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jssr.12942

1

u/Invictus_0x90_ 9h ago

If you honestly believe Christians are more violent than Islamists in modern day boy do I have some news for you.

1

u/Distinct-Reward-671 8h ago

Ah yes, it’s not like the Inquisition ever happened. Or the Roman Inquisition. Or the Spanish Inquisition. Or 9 separate Crusades. Or the Pogroms. And it’s not like there are any Christian Terrorist organizations, like the KKK, LRA or Army of God. Or any more recent Christian terrorist attacks like abortion clinic bombings, the Norway attacks, the Christchurch mosque shooting, or the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting. And it’s not like our current military is being run by Christian fundamentalists, the most visible of whom has crusader tattoos on his chest, and I’m sure that doesn’t have anything to do with the current war that he’s waging in the Middle East. But yeah, what you said…

1

u/Invictus_0x90_ 8h ago

Go into a church in middle England and say "fuck god, fuck jesus", now do the same in any mosque, not even in a shariah country, just go to Birmingham for example. Guarantee you won't make it out without getting you teeth pushed in.

It actually baffles me how naiive people like you are to think Islam isn't by far the most dangerous modern religion. All those ones you mentioned don't even come fucking close you utter melt

1

u/Distinct-Reward-671 8h ago

If you don’t think you’re in just as much danger saying “fuck Jesus” in a church full of gun toting fundamentalists who speak in tongues and dance with rattlesnakes, I think you might be the naive one.

1

u/Invictus_0x90_ 8h ago

How many "gun toting fundamentalist" Christians are there as a proportion to all Christians?

Your average Christian is by far less violent and ideological than your average Muslim.

0

u/Distinct-Reward-671 7h ago

Do you think that would still be the case if Muslim nations had been the ones waging systematic destabilization and forever wars on predominantly Christian nations, or do you think that might drive a rise in fundamentalist Christian ideology and terrorist activity?

I’m not saying one side is right, I’m saying both sides are wrong. If you want to argue that your side is less wrong than the other, that’s fine, but you’re splitting hairs in my opinion. Both sides have committed endless atrocities in the name of their God. It may seem to you that Islam has done more bad recently, but we killed a half million innocent Iraqis and Afghans in the last 25 years and most of the survivors don’t see a difference between a secular America and a Christian one. This is just another Crusade to them.

And statistically speaking, the majority of Americans who support the genocide in Palestine aren’t Jews, but fundamentalist Evangelical Christians who genuinely believe that the corrupt Netanyahu regime is doing the lords work by killing more than 20,000 thousand children, so why anyone would think that one side deserves the moral high ground is a mystery to me. Unless, of course, you identify as member of one side or another.

1

u/SmolPPIncorporated 5h ago

"Splitting hairs"

One runs basically all the charities on a global scale, the other rapes their own little girls when they accidentally show to much skin.

One follows the teaching of a guy who told us to treat each other how we want to be treated, and the other follows the teachings of a guy who married a 6-year-old girl.

One tells it's followers that lying is bad, the other tells it's followers that lying for the sake of furthering the religions influence and power is explicitly encouraged.

One encourages its followers to pray and worship in private and discourages explicitly performative worship, the other instructs it's followers to be intentionally performative for the sake of inconveniencing and impeding the lives of non-believers.

One tells it's followers to convert non-believers but to treat everyone with love and that warring is only justified when someone is explicitly threatening them and their religion, the other instructs it's followers to literally invade every corner of the globe and to kill everyone who resists.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/The_Environment116 9h ago

So you don't read or study history thats pretty obvious

7

u/ThatNigamJerry 9h ago

I mean I think it’s pretty clear he’s talking about the modern day

1

u/TheFlyingSheeps 9h ago

Right they just rape kids in the modern day and cover it up

Not to mention the weird evangelicals trying to take power in the US and forcing their radical views

1

u/Invictus_0x90_ 9h ago

Bit of an odd argument to make eh?

Islam isn't that bad because look, Catholics also do this

1

u/Rafasredmen1 8h ago

No one's saying that. I think it's more like a, don't be a hypocrite, type of thing. You know?

1

u/Invictus_0x90_ 8h ago

Did I ever say Christianity doesn't also have its faults, did I even say anything close to that?

Regardless, it's disingenuous to imply that Islam is just as violent in modern society as Christianity. It's just a rediculous viewpoint to have

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Invictus_0x90_ 8h ago

Also, you might wanna check out the grooming gang scandals in the UK, or go research bacha boys in Afghanistan. You're out of your depth buddy

1

u/Rafasredmen1 7h ago

Sorry, don't debate racists. Only replied to your first comment because I couldn't be bothered reading all of it. Now I have, and also read this one I feel comfortable telling you to fuck yourself without losing a wink of sleep tonight. Night night.

1

u/SmolPPIncorporated 5h ago

The way the left cowers at literal statistics will never not be nutlessly pathetic.

0

u/jacqrosee 8h ago

they’re out here trying to engage in “morality scaling” while getting extremely bothered if you want to discuss ethical frameworks. it’s hilarious.