A team of experts argued both sides of the motion "Islam Is a Religion of Peace" in a recent Intelligence Squared U.S. debate. Two argued in favor and two against.The debate is also here, where there appear to be a lot of other good debates. Here is the debate outcome was a big NO:
Prior to the debate, the audience was polled as to what they thought about the issue, and results showed 41 percent were for the motion, 25 percent were against it and 34 percent were undecided.A high point of the debate is when the pro-Islam-peace guy is asked why more moslem do not denounce terrorism. He said that some do, and more would if it were not for the fact that they get murdered if they speak out against terrorism.
While a number of arguments were brought to the table, the dialogue was mainly rooted in questioning the original Islamic principles of violence against the doctrine of peace, both of which are dealt with in the Quran. The main issues raised included the necessity to put the more violent passages of the Quran into historical context.
Those speaking against the motion said absolutist believers failed in their attempts to contextualize the Quran. But Khan said extremists were simply circumnavigating the issue at hand.
"[The absolutists] are using Islam to cover for their political grievances," he said. "Their real issue lies with Western domination."
At the end of the debate, the opposing side concluded that while reformed Muslims do exist in the Western world, existing extremists are living by the Quran in its entirety, including the violence it contains.
After the debate, poll results revealed a drastic change from the results at the beginning of the night — 36 percent were for the motion, 55 percent were against it and 9 percent were undecided.
To learn more about Mohammedan violence, see www.thereligionofpeace.com.