http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... =124494788"Much to my surprise, the Islamic scriptures in the Quran were actually far less bloody and less violent than those in the Bible," Jenkins says.
Now, of course, it is easy to cherry pick quotes from both books, as both are long and not exactly written in a time when more humane trends where prevalent. So, just using the main books to judge the religions shouldn't be the final comparison. The books are just part of a comparison, as most religious people rarely actually follow the text, nor is it really possible.
Which one is more accepting in modern times? That leans much more towards Christianity, but as the lovely Chrisitians in North Carolina proved this week they aren't quite as far from Muslim extremists as they would believe. Yes, I realize they didn't bomb any LGBT people or kill someone over a cartoon, but this is definitely a step towards the area of the moral spectrum the Muslim extremists reside in. Obviously, not all the way by any means, but it's in that direction.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... ms/475125/
All that being said, I do kind of lean towards Sam Harris' view of Islam. It is a big part of the problem (the other parts being socioeconomic).
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... tions.html...we have an idea here that all religions are the same, that they're all equally wise or equally empty or equally irrelevant. And this is obviously devout believers of various religions don't believe this, but -- but secular liberals tend to believe this. And it's just not true. Our religions are quite different.
Where I differ with most is believing hard power can solve this problem. More bombs, more drones, more intelligence, more soldiers, more fronts, more battles, etc. Hard power is popular because it feels like we are doing something. There are tangible and measurable results, at least there appears to be. Just ask McNamara. In reality, they are just as difficult to measure as soft power, but soft power doesn't have cool explosions on the nightly news.
Soft power wins are what Jacob noted earlier when he compared how the US assimilates immigrants and how Europe does. Of course, this is only one battle in the war.
This is a culture war. This war won't be directly won by how much territory ISIS can take, as hard power won't win that territory. Soft power will. The battle isn't how many of them we kill or how many of us they can kill, or how much territory is taken militarily. The battle is for the support of the Muslim moderates/normal citizen, which won't be won with planes, guns, or bombs. Though, it can be lost by them.
This type of war takes a long time. The Cold War is a prime example. It took decades and finally ended when a Soviet Union weakened by years of losing the culture war (weakened grip on Warsaw Pact countries due in part to Western culture/ideas and poorly managed economy) had the last leg of the stool kicked out from under it by a sustained oil price crash. Though, our current enemy is no where near as strong as the Soviet Union.
We have failed time and again in winning the soft power side of this conflict. From going into Iraq initially to using drone strikes in multiple countries that kill terrorists as much as they cause collateral damage. Building a wall, not allowing any Muslims into the country, potentially putting a semi-totalitarian state around our Muslim communities with heavy handed police actions, etc. are all soft power fails for us.
We are considered to be the #1 threat to world peace.
http://www.wingia.com/en/services/about ... ults/7/33/
That is a massive loss in the culture war. Especially, considering we produce a shit ton of soft power with our basic culture outside of our foreign policy decisions, which also makes us the "US, Canada and Australia are the countries where most people would like to live if they could."
If we don't win the soft power war, what happens when the Saudi and Persian Gulf governments fall when oil goes the way of coal in a decade or two? Part of Iraq and the vast majority of the Arabian peninsula, with the potential for more when those dominoes start falling, is a nice beginning to a real Caliphate. If that happens, then we will have the hard power war everyone seems to want.
Note: This is why I started this thread. Getting used to these attacks is a soft power victory for us. Not a massive one, but it is one. Also, I'm not suggesting hard power doesn't have it's place, but it's not as big as commonly believed.