1

My answer to this question was deleted. At that time, it had a total score of 0 (2 upvotes, 2 downvotes), and was the accepted answer. Screenshots of the full answer with complete comment section can be found here: 1, 2, 3, 4.

The reason given for the delete seems to be one of those listed here.

I fail to see how this answer fails to address the question or is non-factual in any parts. It addresses the text of the answer - by pointing out the implicit confirmation bias, pointing out that doctrinally terrorism seems to not be supported, and in the last section of the answer citing studies about the level of support for terrorism among Muslims - as well as the title of the question by addressing which violent aspects Islam contains, both doctrinally and historically.

In contrast, the other two answers talk about their experience with their social circle, and taken together contain one piece of relevant information with regard to Islamic doctrine: that modern Islamic scholars mostly oppose terrorism.

I don't see how my answer failed to address the question (in particular since it was the accepted answer); and if it did fail to address the question, I don't understand why it was deleted instead of pointing out its flaws to me.

  • Just seen your answer and it shows your research work providing with some references nicely but I would like to ask a question from you as you have answered it according to your own perspectives ,Suppose you are given a Kingdom ,would you be able to bring peace over there by not punishing the rule breakers or corrupt people ,assuming you are not going to punish them what would be the output no peace at all no system or You have a classroom and you have not made any rules for punishments what would happen in the end no peace. – Faqirah Jan 18 '17 at 15:10
  • So according to one perspective you assume it as non peaceful but infact these laws are made for betterment to bring peace. – Faqirah Jan 18 '17 at 15:12
  • @Faqirah Quite a few countries don't kill adulterers, gays, witches, and dissenters, don't cut the hands off thieves or flog teenagers for having sex, and don't make war on other countries for having different religious convictions, yet have quite peaceful societies. In any event, that question is irrelevant to the question of whether or not Islam is peaceful. I didn't cite my own opinion, I cited acclaimed works of highly regarded Islamic scholars, and substantial polls by reputable centers of inquiry. – G. Bach Jan 18 '17 at 15:17
  • But the scholars never mentioned Islam as non peaceful. – Faqirah Jan 18 '17 at 15:27
  • @Faqirah They also don't call it oppressive towards homosexuals, but it is. The point is, of course scholars of Islam will not call Islam negative in any aspects, but that doesn't mean it isn't. – G. Bach Jan 18 '17 at 15:28
  • Jesus peace be upon him said "Do not think that I came to bring peace on Earth .I did not come to bring peace ,but a sword"(Matthew 10:34) biblehub.com/matthew/10-34.htm so it would not be correct to conclude that the religion preached by him was about war and violence for these relate to some occasions.In Gita the holy book of hindus considered for moral values along with it is the exhortation of Krishna to Arjuna encouraging to fight as well (Gita 3:30) bhagavad-gita.org/Gita/verse-03-30.html. – Faqirah Jan 18 '17 at 15:45
  • 1
    @Faqirah This is getting off-topic pretty fast. If you'd like to talk to me about this, please create a chat room and invite me. – G. Bach Jan 18 '17 at 15:50
2

Your post was flagged as being inappropriate. Upon review, the answer as written was pure polemic: Except for the first paragraph, it had pretty much nothing whatsoever to do with the actual question being asked (namely, "How can I defend Islam as being a peaceful religion?").

We are not a site for argument and debate: Posts are expected to directly answer the question asked, not try to wedge in alternate points of view. We are not, and never have been, a site for pushing Truth; we're here to answer clear, specific, and answerable questions about the topic of Islam.

Allowing this sort of injection of alternate viewpoints just turns the whole Stack Exchange model into a popularity contest, where answers are far more likely to attract votes based on what the voters agree with rather than because it's remotely helpful to the OP's actual question.

Given the fact that 95% of the post was decidedly tangential to the question asked, and since the question itself had already been closed to prevent it from atttracting opinion-based answers, I saw no value in attempting to salvage the post. Thus, deleted.

  • "Upon review, the answer as written was pure polemic: Except for the first paragraph, it had pretty much nothing whatsoever to do with the actual question being asked (namely, "How can I defend Islam as being a peaceful religion?")." The question came from the assumption that Islam is a peaceful religion; that assumption is not correct as far as I can tell and as far as the highly regarded works of fiqh I cited show. When someone asks "what are the four elements that make up water", the correct answer is "water is made up of two elements, hydrogen and oxygen". How is that polemic? – G. Bach Jan 7 '17 at 20:54
  • If the question however isn't about whether or not Islam is a peaceful religion, but how to defend it as one whether or not it is, then that question would be purely about apologetics and clearly off-topic. Since the user asking the question accepted my answer, I had the impression that his question was actually not about how to defend Islam regardless of whether or not it is peaceful, and that I did not fail to answer it. – G. Bach Jan 7 '17 at 21:03

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .