the JI's aims is to convert
singapore into an islamic state by bombing us... 0.0 i dun know how
that's possible, getting a group of liars to stain the religion of
islam, its just plain stupid. killing in the name of islam? i dun
think the quran ever justified that :)
Not quite. Islam was spread by the conquering of neighbouring
nations around Mecca when it first came about. See also how the
Prophet Muhammed "persuaded" Mecca to become Muslim. I don't think
you can have conquests without plenty of death on both sides.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_of_Islam)
Also,
2:190-193 Fight
in the cause of God,
those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth
not transgressors. And slay
them wherever ye catch them,
and turn them out from where they have turned you out: For tumult
and oppression are worse than slaughter; But
fight them not at the sacred Mosque unless they first fight you
there; But if they fight you, Slay them.
Such is the reward of those who suppress faith. But if they cease,
God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight
them on until there is no more tumult or
oppression,
and there prevail justice and faith in God; but if they cease, Let
there be no hostility except to those who practise
oppression."
So killing is allowed, just until the opposers back off. That's
fine, most countries do this. (In the name of their country, not
Islam.)
Though they do have a particular like for Jews and
Christians.
9:5 But when the
forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans
wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in
wait for them in every stratagem; but if they repent, and
establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open
the way for them: for God is Oft-forgiving, Most
Merciful.
Seems a rather "accept Islam or face our wrath" kind of thing.
(I've no idea what this forbidden months mean though. It is
mentioned in 9:1 about four months something.)
Note: To any Muslims out there, I
do not mean to offend. I understand that this is the English
translation of the Arabic text and the words translated may have
been altered to have its meaning harsher that what it should be. If
you have a better translation of the original text or an
explanation of why your book says this, I would be happy to try to
understand from your point of view.
Also, not saying that other religions don't have violent
histories either. (Christianity - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades ,
etc.)
But coming back to the OP yeah, we are rather apathetic, in
general. =P