The evil that is Islam

In order to recognise Islam as objectively evil one must provide absolute proof from its vital holy text, the Qu"ran, clearly demonstrating such an inherent evil, rather than reference openly anti-Islamic websites which hold strong bias against it and make fallacious generalisations on the basis of inhumane crimes committed in the name of the religion. It is not logical that Islam, as a religion in its own right, is to be classed as evil based on so-called "Jihadist" activities, namely the bombings of Kenya, Bali, London, Madrid, Afghanistan and Iraq that you cited. This is because you are assuming two things: an incorrect definition of "Jihad" and that these attacks were committed by those whose interpretations of the Qu"ran, and Islam in general, are perfect. Firstly, the term "Jihad" denotes two things: a faithful"s struggle to be the best Muslim that he or she can be or a struggle to defend, and I"ll repeat, defend Islam by force if necessary. Therefore, by citing so-called "Jihadist" bombings you are not showing that Islam is evil, given that you are assuming the wrong definition, and, also that their interpretation is correct. This is a simultaneous fallacy. You correctly refer to the verses I quoted in round 1 as Meccan and assumed their peaceful nature was because of "the prophet was not in a strong position" and his later trip to Medina led to "violent" verses. However, this is a factual error on your part. Consider the following, peaceful Medinian verse: "Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error" - Qur'an 2:256. This shows that, despite being led to war due to the aggressive Quraysh tribe, Muhammad is being told by God that indoctrination is not tolerated in Islam, nor is forced conversion. Therefore, your assertion that "the (gentler) Meccan verses were abrogated by later (violent) ones after the journey to Medina" is false. Additionally, your mention of the "Satanic verses" is misleading, and, given the story"s incoherent chronology, it is not a sufficient condition for Islam to be classed as absolutely evil. Anyhow, Muhammad did not order his followers to "acknowledge the 3 pagan gods of the Arabs of Mecca" and there is no historical evidence to suggest this. This leads me onto Aisha. It is a matter of fact that her age has not been historically verified and there is a large debate over this; your assertion that she was 6 years of age at the time of marriage and 9 for consummation ignores the strong evidence of favour of her being 19 at the time of marriage and I am willing to delve into much greater detail should you want to pursue this. Speculating over this issue and providing anti-Islamic websites as citations will not provide definitive proof over the morality of Islam. For now, I shall cite the following Qu"ranic verses which makes physical maturation (post-puberty) a requirement for marriage: 4:6, 24:31 and 24:58-59. By referring to a so-called "genocidal war" put into motion by Muhammad with regards to the Banu Qurayza tribe, and citing the number of executions as "600-900" you are distorting the truth and, yet again, being speculative. This tribe was one who had intense, meticulous dialogue with the Quraysh tribe of Mecca and had three times plotted against and subsequently betrayed Muhammad and the constitution of Medina prior to their siege. In warfare, especially in cases of life or death, you cannot expect a military general who had been persecuted for a number of years to simply wait until he and his followers were themselves killed. It was, after all, a war. Also, the number of executions is also a cause for discourse. Employing "decapitations, amputations, crucifixion and burning alive depicted, plus the horrific abuse of women in honor killings" as reasons to class Islam as objectively evil is fallacious and a hasty generalisation of Islam. This is because these incidences occur across the globe, non-Muslims including, and are not quantifiable. It does not follow that because of these actions, inspired by ancient cultural tradition rather than Islam, that Islam is evil because you are reducing a religion to the actions of minorities. May I also note that 'Islam' did not burn the Great Library of Alexandria (as this was destroyed over time by various civilisations including the Romans) or the other monuments you mentioned. Again, you've made a fallacious generalisation. I will now step away from adopting a falsification approach and concentrate on developing my own argument. Consider the 5 pillars of Islam: the Shahadah (declaration of faith: 'I testify that there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his final messenger'), Salah (5 daily prayers), Zakat (alms-giving), Sawm (fasting) and Hajj (pilgrimage). These are all objective realities and together they encompass teachings of the Qu'ran, Islam's definitive text. All of them alleviate pain and/or increase happiness. Thus, they can be considered moral and therefore Islam is not evil.