• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Can a radical Muslim be a good American?

Can a radical Muslim be a good American?

  • Total voters
    27
no, but neither can a radical Christian nor a Mormon.
 
Mellie said:
How can anyone who takes delight in the death of Americans be a good one?
Click to expand...

You're looking at "Muslim Extremist" and associating it with "middle east anti American terrorist" . . . and assigning those crimes done within that country against ours to the 'radical'

I imagine that 'radical' is a wide-label. What *is* radical? Blowing up buildings? Advocating for your religion? Preachig your beliefs? Killing people?

Which one is radical? I think people truly feel that 'radical' is anyone who is open, loud, zealous or emphatic about their beliefs. I really don't think taht people associate the term 'radical' with 'killing people in the name of'
 
Blackdog said:
He did not say anything about your general run of the mill Muslim, he said "radical" specifically.
Click to expand...

Um yes. And I agreed with him. And then I said the same would be true of radical Christians. I said "radical" specifically. I really don't understand why this is so hard for you to understand. Should I use smaller words?

Blackdog said:
It happens every time someone mentions a Muslim situation. Oh but Christians did this, thats bull****. The number of radical Muslims vs almost anything else is huge. So it does not compare, and yet people still use it as a comparison every chance they get.
Click to expand...

Wow, thin skin. I'm so sorry that you poor Christians have had your beliefs questioned. There, all better?

As for my comment about True Believers, I stand by that. Not all Christians are "True Believers." Many are intelligent, well meaning, wonderful people who believe in evolution and otherwise embrace science.

Once more, I make comments about SOME Christians and you keep pretending that I am commenting about ALL Christians, even though the meaning of my words is as clear as can be.

Now, where's my apology for calling me a bigot?
 
Groucho said:
Um yes. And I agreed with him. And then I said the same would be true of radical Christians. I said "radical" specifically. I really don't understand why this is so hard for you to understand. Should I use smaller words?
Click to expand...

More ad-homs with no substance.

You got nothing.

Duly noted.


Groucho said:
Wow, thin skin. I'm so sorry that you poor Christians have had your beliefs questioned. There, all better?

As for my comment about True Believers, I stand by that. Not all Christians are "True Believers." Many are intelligent, well meaning, wonderful people who believe in evolution and otherwise embrace science.

Once more, I make comments about SOME Christians and you keep pretending that I am commenting about ALL Christians, even though the meaning of my words is as clear as can be.

Now, where's my apology for calling me a bigot?
Click to expand...

You get no apology, your statements are plain and simple. :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
i didn't realise you had to have a set of specific beliefs to be a good american. a radical muslim could be a good american, as long as they obey the law.
 
spud_meister said:
i didn't realise you had to have a set of specific beliefs to be a good american. a radical muslim could be a good american, as long as they obey the law.
Click to expand...

That's an oxymoron.
 
Navy Pride said:
This question begs to be asked....
Click to expand...

Ah, my right-wing extremist friend, how I have missed you.

The correct answer, of course, is yes. A radical anything can even in their zeal obey the law of the land.

We've got plenty of radicals here in the great USA, and while they grumble and hiss and spit, by and large they respect the rule of law.
 
Mellie said:
That's an oxymoron.
Click to expand...

how? there are no laws against radical thoughts, or speech, an american can call for a theocratic america all they want, they're entitled to under free speech, and as long as they do nothing illegal, they are still being good citizens.
 
spud_meister said:
how? there are no laws against radical thoughts, or speech, an american can call for a theocratic america all they want, they're entitled to under free speech, and as long as they do nothing illegal, they are still being good citizens.
Click to expand...

Seems like we have different definitions of "radical". The very definition, in my mind, includes illegal activity.
 
Mellie said:
Seems like we have different definitions of "radical". The very definition, in my mind, includes illegal activity.
Click to expand...

well what makes the radical, in your definition, can they be radical without carrying out illegal activity?

to me, a radical is a person that believes their ideology supersedes all others, and wish to see it spread, and also as a form of governance, and wish to force other people to subject to it, whether they carry out their ideas as actions is irrelevant.
 
Lets look at the definition:

–adjective
1. of or going to the root or origin; fundamental: a radical difference.
2. thoroughgoing or extreme, esp. as regards change from accepted or traditional forms: a radical change in the policy of a company.
3. favoring drastic political, economic, or social reforms: radical ideas; radical and anarchistic ideologues.
4. forming a basis or foundation.
5. existing inherently in a thing or person: radical defects of character.
6. Mathematics .
a. pertaining to or forming a root.
b. denoting or pertaining to the radical sign.
c. irrational ( def. 5b ) .
7. Grammar . of or pertaining to a root.
8. Botany . of or arising from the root or the base of the stem.
–noun
9. a person who holds or follows strong convictions or extreme principles; extremist.
10. a person who advocates fundamental political, economic, and social reforms by direct and often uncompromising methods.

Well it looks like far more than just religion constitutes what is and is not radical.

Funny how that is.

So we have anyone who is far right or left politically is a radical. Anyone who is or is not a traditionalist is a radical. SO basically anyone who has an extreme view of anything is a radical.

So we can add atheists and agnostics into the mix along with everyone else.
 
Last edited:
Blackdog said:
9. a person who holds or follows strong convictions or extreme principles; extremist.
10. a person who advocates fundamental political, economic, and social reforms by direct and often uncompromising methods.[/b]
Click to expand...

they be more or less my definition

Well it looks like far more than just religion constitutes what is and is not radical.

Funny how that is.

So we have anyone who is far right or left politically is a radical. Anyone who is or is not a traditionalist is a radical. SO basically anyone who has an extreme view of anything is a radical.

So we can add atheists and agnostics into the mix along with everyone else.
Click to expand...

i thought that was self explanatory really, anyone can be a radical with almost any ideology.
 
spud_meister said:
i thought that was self explanatory really, anyone can be a radical with almost any ideology.
Click to expand...

I know that Spud. It is just that far FAR too many here seem to think religion is responsible for all the worlds ills and take any opportunity to bash it. Predominantly with Muslims and Christians.

So I wanted to be clear.
 
spud_meister said:
i didn't realise you had to have a set of specific beliefs to be a good american. a radical muslim could be a good american, as long as they obey the law.
Click to expand...

If that's your definition of "good", to simply obey the law, then I agree with you.
However I think there is more meaning behind the word "good", and if one is to be labeled a "good American" he needs to be a good person.
A radical Muslim in my mind is a person who believes in radical Islamic beliefs such as the Ummah and the global Jihad against the infidels, etc.
That ain't no good.
 
The question is badly defined and lacks context. So, I will interpret it this way. Good citizen = following the laws of a country and a general belief that the mainstream culture of the country is good or at least not bad and therefore has some motivation to take part in it. Radical = person who primarily follows the laws of the ideal or belief they espouse over the environment they find themselves in day to day.

A lot of Islam's rules are not compatible with American society when followed closely and a radical will follow the rules of their cause closely (or what they perceive the rules to be). Since the two are fundamentally incompatible (for example Sharia law of Islam vs secular enlightenment principals of the US) than a person is going to eventually have to choose which one will be their primary cause (unless they simply do not think about it, but then they are not radicals). The assumption here is since the person in question is a radical, they have or will choose Islamic ideals over western ones (defined as mostly based on secular enlightenment ideals of late 1700s France and US) they will not be able to be a good citizen because of natural tension between the two sets of principals.

Ultimately, the radical will find a way to surround themselves with what they think is the best way, whether that means surround themselves with friends of the same persuasion, go to another country, or alter their surroundings in some other manner. If they fail to do that, they will either become unhappy or act out (God forbid). However, ultimately, I think this is based on the tension between the two sets of principals more than it is the radicalism itself.

Please note that a radical Amish person will probably not have these same tensions because the Amish tradition is recognized (if gawked at) as a part of the country, which makes it easier for those people to fit in. This is probably also true with many Christian sects, even though some are at odds with the country as it currently is.
 
Last edited:
As an American radical I must vote YES. Not all ideologues carry out evil, wicked, mean, and nasty events. Some of us are simply here to balance out the reactionaries. Radical is generally thought of as a political bent. IOW I can be a political radical and a good Christian at the same time. It's only used to describe religion with the Muslims because they mix their religion and politics. We don't have radical Christians. We have Evangelical Christians.

So, can a few radical minded Muslims obey the laws of the USA (I'm assuming we're talking about citizens here)? Sure. We have plenty of these individuals in our country already.
 
Mellie said:
Seems like we have different definitions of "radical". The very definition, in my mind, includes illegal activity.
Click to expand...

Using that definition, you don't need to include anything past the word "radical". If being radical means taking part in illegal activity, then being radical means you cannot be a good American. So why add "Muslim" after that?
 
Navy Pride said:
I don't see Christians or Mormons as suicide bombers...........
Click to expand...

No, they try and live when they bomb government buildings and abortion clinics. That makes it much better.
 
Hatuey said:
Such as? Can you show us an atheist who's done such thing? I'll wait.
Click to expand...
I don't know... Maybe Mao who made the state religion/ideology atheism for the largest country of people on the planet? Lenin is another example, who made the state ideology for the Soviet Union atheism. There have been several atheist regimes that restrict religious freedom (or try to destroy religion) and impose atheism. There are many atheists I have met who believe all religion is foolish and should be abolished. Is it not radical for one's views to include the destruction of others views? For many to militantly mouth foam about how much they hate religion and that it must be destroyed? One specific example would be Richard Dawkins. He is an arrogant real life troll that vomits his hatred through the guise of "intelligence."
Theists are definetely a lot more explosive in their radicalism, do you disagree?
Click to expand...
I can't disagree with that. I will say that radical Muslims (like Iran) who literally want to kill everyone and bring about their crazy apocalypse are the most radical of the radical.
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
No, they try and live when they bomb government buildings and abortion clinics. That makes it much better.
Click to expand...

Well the Bible does not tell them to do that. No sect of Christianity does, they take it upon themselves and use religion as an excuse. The same cannot be said of radical Islam.
 
Mellie said:
Seems like we have different definitions of "radical". The very definition, in my mind, includes illegal activity.
Click to expand...

That's what I was going by as well, which is why I pointed out that radical Christians were just as bad.
 
Groucho said:
That's what I was going by as well, which is why I pointed out that radical Christians were just as bad.
Click to expand...

But as I have shown the religion or sects of Christianity do not endorse the criminal behavior. Some sects in Islam do exactly that. They are in no way the same.

Your reasoning leaves much to be desired.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom