From: jodar@aludra.usc.edu (Nicholas Jodar)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: SOC.RELIGION.ISLAM.AHMADIYYA
Date: 7 Nov 1992 09:32:40 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: aludra.usc.edu
Summary: Let's rethink this....
Keywords: Newsgroup Names....

In article <100938@bu.edu> khalid@bu-bio.bu.edu (Rasheed A. Khalid) writes:

>... I've also suggested the following to both Ahmadis and
>non-Ahmadis:

>1.  Since Ahmadis claim that they are the true Muslims
>and that non-Ahmadis are not, they should be allowed
>a newsgroup with the name soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya,
>or the one that Ed suggests above, if they accept it, and

The problem with this is that, if the Ahmadis believe that their
version of Islam is the correct one, distinguishing it as
'Ahmadiyyan Islam' defeats the purpose of the label.

Likewise for non-Ahmadis as given below:

>2.  Since non-Ahmadis have the same claim of being true
>Muslims as opposed to Ahmadis, they too should be
>allowed a newsgroup soc.religion.islam.non-Ahmadiyya.

Islam is a noun, not an adjective.  Those who believe that there 
is one 'genuine Islam' would not suffer it to be linked with 
something else.  For anyone advocating 'THE Islam,' making a 
subgroup called soc.religion.islam.whatever is like shooting
themselves in the foot.

It is indeed depressing if we have learned nothing from the 
failure of the Christians who, despite having the same origin 
of Faith, have begun differentiating themselves as 'Mormons,' 
'Presbyterians,' 'Roman Catholics,' etc.  (Thank GOD there are 
still some rational people among them who simply refer to 
themselves as 'Christian.')

>Under the present name (soc.religion.islam) Ahmadis
>may raise the fair objection that their religion, Islam
>is being misrepresented by non-Ahmadis who they consider
>non-genuine Muslims.  Therefore, they may argue in
>favor of changing the name of soc.religion.islam, since
>they are not represented there in spite of being Muslims
>themselves.  

This was the argument made (that the religion of Islam was not
being faithfully represented within soc.religion.islam).  This 
argument is neither supported by evidence, nor by common sense.  
For better or worse, all ideas and philosophies are represented
by those who PRACTICE them.  Anybody who thinks they have a
monopoly on a way of thinking is bound by duty to display the
practical effects of it to others.

'Do as I say, not as I do,' does not constitute 'representation.'

Those who think they know what Islam is are required to instruct
others.  The Ahmadis (do they call themselves that?) seek to
convince others that 'their' Islam is the 'only real one.'  To be
successful, they have to present their arguments within the 
confines of the soc.religion.islam group; that is the group which
was created soley for the discussion of the RELIGION OF ISLAM.
Nobody can claim to be unrepresented in such a group, either.
The only way for a person, or persons, to be excluded from the
soc.religion groups, (which represent NOBODY), is to keep quiet.

Heck, even the Christians are represented in soc.religion.islam....

IF, on the other hand, the Ahmadis wish to have a group all to
themselves, they cannot claim to represent Islam within it.
Islam is a world religion, defined by those who call themselves
muslims and those who deal with them.

So what's wrong with 'soc.religion.ahmadi'?  If what the Ahmadis
claim is true, (that they are the only real muslims), then their
group would be the de facto 'soc.religion.RealIslam,' and those
seeking the Truth would end up there.

-AQ

[I beg Allah's forgiveness for my weakness and insufficiency in ]
['His' service, and I ask for his protection from Shaitan and   ]
[from my own Desires.  None can protect me except Allah.  If I  ]
[have made any errors, I beg Allah to bring them to my attention]
[so that they may be corrected.  If I have made none, then it is]
[only through the Grace of Allah and all praise is due only to  ]
['Him.'                                                         ]

Newsgroups: uk.net,news.groups,soc.culture.british