[redsniper]

Fox tends to be more stupid and ignorant than they are blatently offensive outside of their talk shows. I don't see the question as one that's intended to have harmful rhetoric, more like one that is in the stance of a double take.

"blatantly offensive" and "harmful rhetoric" are basically their bread and butter.

[Mongoose]

EDIT: I wonder if the people at Fox realize that Muslims and Christians worship the same god.

Clearly you've never met any of the Bible-thumpers that vehemently deny that.

[BrotherBryon]

This is where Fox News just utterly fails, watch the interview he had at the Daily Show (AKA FAKE NEWS SHOW) a couple of weeks ago and then watch the Fox News interview and see how a COMEDIAN does a better job of interviewing people than so called reporters. Not only is it obvious that John Oliver (Who is filling in for Jon Stewart) actually read a bit of the book but he is also able to engage his guest with relevant questions to the subject matter. Some thing the Fox News anchors forgot how to do (If they ever knew in first place) a long time ago. Just a truly sad and pathetic observation of the state of modern news media, if you can even call them that any more.

[Dark RevenantX]

And here we see a perfect example of why corporate news has poisoned the news itself.  You don't see as much of this bull**** (if at all) on NPO-run stations.  Once the news' purpose became more about the bottom line than the actual task of informing the viewer, it hit the ****ter.

[Luis Dias]

I like Fox News. I appreciate their openly being absolutely transparent in their ideological prejudices, biases and shenanigans. It's the best window towards the psychology of at least 30% of 'Murica, and perhaps a lot more than that.

Yes, how "dare" a person make an analysis of Jesus if he is a muslim. Clearly the guy has an agenda that must coincide with the likes of Al Quaeda and so on. The book is most assuredly filled with lies and communist muslim propaganda.

Joking aside, the idea that islam is "very similar" to christianity is somewhat ridiculous... no their theological narratives are absurdly different, with very different real world consequences.

[Phantom Hoover]

care to elaborate (that sounds interesting)

[Dragon]

Joking aside, the idea that islam is "very similar" to christianity is somewhat ridiculous... no their theological narratives are absurdly different, with very different real world consequences.

I'm not claiming that they're identical, merely that they have a lot in common, much more than it's assumed. Of course, there are big differences in their beliefs, but the "backstory" and the basic assumptions (the "point" the religion is trying to get across) are really similar, in many cases, literally identical (the Old Testament and a good part of the new one are accepted in both). What differs greatly is the interpretation and philosophy derived from it.

[Luis Dias]

Well the main difference is obviously while islam is absolutely monotheistic, with a far-away god that is inscrutable, innefable, uknowable, therefore unable to be represented in any way whatsoever (this is why it is forbidden to represent it, for example), where the only exception to this absolute gap between Him and us is by the connection he made with the prophet Mohammed, Christianity is all about the Trinity. This means that in Christianity, God is also this "unknowable" monotheistic absolute but with a difference: he made the choice to become human like us, to suffer with us, to struggle with us, to die with us. He even becomes an atheist at the very end ("My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?",Matthew 27:46)... Then, when God dies at the cross, the holy spirit takes over. This is the idea that Christ developed, where he stated that whenever any of his followers were gathered in his name, "he" would be present with them. This is the Holy Spirit and the basis, among many other things, for the existence of the Church itself. (One could even say that it is the same kind of idea that drives other kinds of "communions", yes even communistic gatherings with "comrades", etc.)

In this sense, "God" in christianity is the social sharing of the struggle against the human condition. There is nothing like this in Islam. Islam means "submission", where God is just way up there in infinity demanding full obedience from His slaves believers. They call themselves "Christianity 2.0" but I personally have a preference on the christian theology.

[knossosfs2]

the only exception to this absolute gap between Him and us is by the connection he made with the prophet Mohammed

I absolutely disagree with this. Muslims believe that God made multiple connections with us, beginning with Adam.

God is just way up there in infinity demanding full obedience from His slaves believers.

This is offensive. I don't care that you struck through that word, but don't ever equate a follower of a religion that you don't agree with to a slave.

[BloodEagle]

What about the ones that were, quite literally, slaves? [/I agree with you, but object to both your commanding tone and use of the word 'ever']

[knossosfs2]

It wasn't meant to be commanding; it was intended as advice as to not offend any Muslim members we have here. Apologies if I came across as authoritative.

[Phantom Hoover]

He's using it to illustrate a point about the difference in the relationships between the Christian and Islamic gods and mankind. I think it's pretty acceptable.

[Apollo]

Aren't Christians then slaves for being terrified of Hell and willingly submitting to religious oppression? Not all of them are like that, but that is very much the religion's historical course.

Islam and Christianity are two sides of the same coin, each having variations that are better or worse than a religion based solely on their respective holy books. The only difference in terms of moral quality is that one of them has, on average (because there is no single, all-encompassing Christian or Islamic religion) modernized faster than the other.

[Luis Dias]

I don't mean to offend anyone, but the gist is undeniable. Alah demands strict full obedience of the converted, and the word "islam" means itself "Submission". This submission is not a crude one, it is something that really changes one person inside out and I don't have any doubts for the intense consequences on one's psyche and life overall. There's nothing wrong per se to be a "slave" to something as metaphysical as a God or an ideology. Such a state of mind can feel quite like freedom, a burst of meaning and a sense of place as nothing else can really substitute for. In such cases, the cynical push of the contrarian or the skeptic is like poison, destroying this real paradise inside the follower's heads.

Incidentally this is why the atheists and agnostics are attacked so often when they dare say anything at all about these matters... just look at the latest reporter in Saudi Arabia that was found guilty of expressing "doubts", and so was condemned to 7 years in prison and 600 slashes. I'm sorry if I offended any muslim, but until these matters are denounced by the majority of muslims, I really don't feel the obligation to cater to such kinds of "sensitivities".

Knossosf2 is right about the correction over the gap thing, I was oversimplifying it. The difference remains, while Yaweh came down, became a man himself and died with us, etc., Allah remains forever up there, as an eternal platonic ideal.

Aren't Christians then slaves for being terrified of Hell and willingly submitting to religious oppression? Not all of them are like that, but that is very much the religion's historical course.

Yeah, the idea of hell hasn't really aged well over the last centuries...

To be precise, I was speaking of the theological core of both religions, not their marginal tactics to keep the believers in, etc.

[knossosfs2]

He's using it to illustrate a point about the difference in the relationships between the Christian and Islamic gods and mankind. I think it's pretty acceptable.

IMHO, it would have been acceptable had the word "slaves" been excluded. The inclusion of this word makes the post offensive, as it appears to be antagonistic toward the Islamic faith.

I'm sorry if I offended any muslim, but until these matters are denounced by the majority of muslims, I really don't feel the obligation to cater to such kinds of "sensitivities".

You are entitled to your own opinion, and I respect you for that, but I don't think you can just say the majority of Muslims doesn't denounce any injustices committed against non-believers without any valid support. For all you know, the majority does indeed denounce these horrendous acts, but not openly; their voices may be suppressed by those who retain power in countries like Saudi Arabia, and they most likely are fearful of the consequences if they do speak out.

Anyway, I think we veered well off topic. We're supposed to be making fun of Fox News 

[Luis Dias]

I haven't seen any muslim outcry over this matter. Burn a koran or draw Mohammed and you'll get embassies burned, slash a man 600 times and throw him to the prison for 7 years for "doubting" and all I hear is a bird whistling in some lonely tree. No, knossos, muslims have to step up and improve their performance if we are to turn the 21st century into a civilized one.

[Dragon]

This is just a matter of culture, not of religion. The same "doubts" would've gotten this man stoned in a Christian community about 1000 years ago. The problem isn't religion, but rather people who happen to be 1000 years backwards. Middle East is a very poorly developed region, and it doesn't really have anything to do with the religion they believe in. It has to do with bone-headed international decisions dating back to World War I. Sharia law, compared to Christian religious laws, is actually a pretty progressive one. It's just that nobody takes the latter seriously since a few hundred years, but due to developmental differences, Sharia is still used (and rightfully causes outcries, because it's plainly outdated). Do not mistake a religion with the culture, as they're connected, but not the same. Islam and Christianity have plenty in common. An average Muslim and an average Christian have a lot less in common, because of many different reasons, most of them not related to religion, but rather to politics and geography.

You probably could find Christians who'd think that 7 years in prison and 600 lashes would be an approbate punishment for a nonbeliever (look in very rural areas of American South and Poland). They'd be most likely old, backwards and bigoted - a sign of bygone age. Now, in the Middle East, such stances are simply more common, because their culture isn't developed as well. Which religion they believe in has nothing to do with it.

[Apollo]

This is just a matter of culture, not of religion. The same "doubts" would've gotten this man stoned in a Christian community about 1000 years ago. The problem isn't religion, but rather people who happen to be 1000 years backwards. Middle East is a very poorly developed region, and it doesn't really have anything to do with the religion they believe in. It has to do with bone-headed international decisions dating back to World War I. Sharia law, compared to Christian religious laws, is actually a pretty progressive one. It's just that nobody takes the latter seriously since a few hundred years, but due to developmental differences, Sharia is still used (and rightfully causes outcries, because it's plainly outdated). Do not mistake a religion with the culture, as they're connected, but not the same. Islam and Christianity have plenty in common. An average Muslim and an average Christian have a lot less in common, because of many different reasons, most of them not related to religion, but rather to politics and geography.

You probably could find Christians who'd think that 7 years in prison and 600 lashes would be an approbate punishment for a nonbeliever (look in very rural areas of American South and Poland). They'd be most likely old, backwards and bigoted - a sign of bygone age. Now, in the Middle East, such stances are simply more common, because their culture isn't developed as well. Which religion they believe in has nothing to do with it.

They are functionally the same thing. The primary Middle-Eastern religion is a horrible caricature of Islam that has been twisted into an oppressive, violently misogynistic faith by Arab culture. So yeah, the religion is the problem, but it is not the same religion that Mohammed created.

EDIT: Basically what I'm saying is that the Middle East is ruled by a barbaric religion but there are multiple religions (or forms, if you prefer that) of Islam and not all of them are that bad.

[An4ximandros]

There is also this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bah%C3%A1'%C3%AD_Faith Which poses some interesting questions when you read its history with Islam.

[knossosfs2]

This is just a matter of culture, not of religion. The same "doubts" would've gotten this man stoned in a Christian community about 1000 years ago. The problem isn't religion, but rather people who happen to be 1000 years backwards. Middle East is a very poorly developed region, and it doesn't really have anything to do with the religion they believe in. It has to do with bone-headed international decisions dating back to World War I. Sharia law, compared to Christian religious laws, is actually a pretty progressive one. It's just that nobody takes the latter seriously since a few hundred years, but due to developmental differences, Sharia is still used (and rightfully causes outcries, because it's plainly outdated). Do not mistake a religion with the culture, as they're connected, but not the same. Islam and Christianity have plenty in common. An average Muslim and an average Christian have a lot less in common, because of many different reasons, most of them not related to religion, but rather to politics and geography.

You probably could find Christians who'd think that 7 years in prison and 600 lashes would be an approbate punishment for a nonbeliever (look in very rural areas of American South and Poland). They'd be most likely old, backwards and bigoted - a sign of bygone age. Now, in the Middle East, such stances are simply more common, because their culture isn't developed as well. Which religion they believe in has nothing to do with it.

This. And it should be noted that although Sharia Law is somewhat based on Islam, it was created by men, for men, to appease the men with power and further oppress those without power. Corruption at its finest.

Luis, what seemed to be a good debate now appears to be an attack on Islam and all Muslims worldwide. You said you were sorry if you offended any Muslims, but you are continuing to offend me by 1. grouping all of the Muslims in the world together and insinuating that they are the same as the Muslims in the Middle East, 2. assuming that all Muslims reacted the same way to the Qur'an burning and other injustices, and 3. implying that Muslims in the Middle East are pathetic in their attempts to "improve their performance." AFAIK, they are attempting to improve their lives and countries at this moment. What do you think is happening in Syria? Tunisia? Libya? Change is gradual. You can't force anyone to change immediately, especially if you want them to be the Western definition of "civilized."

all I hear is a bird whistling in some lonely tree

Where I live, there are hundreds of flocks, with each bird chirping away. If you took the time to research, you'd find that many Muslims worldwide are against these corrupt practices.

Apollo, I agree with you about how Islam has been corrupted in the Middle East, but I feel the need to point out that there are some educated people there who are trying to resist the twisted faith. Additionally, I believe the culture and the corrupt religion are both the problem.

Also,

it is not the same religion that was revealed to Mohammed.

minor correction