It’s just that it’s what I have observed here in my country. Someone, a few years ago, made some offhand remark about Muhammad. I must admit that she should have said it in a more appropriate way. Yet, death seemed to harsh a sentence for her. A bomb killed her along with many innocent bystanders.
Perhaps only a few Muslims get unhinged, but the damage they do isn’t limited to a few.

Why would you want to denigrate the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in front of Muslims in the first place? Would you like Muslims to denigrate your religion or prophets?

I believe that religious dialog is possible without resorting to denigrating Muhammad and the other prophets. This is because I do not want others to denigrate who and what I believe. In fact, I also believe that everyone must practice:

Respect for everyone, even if you don’t agree with their beliefs.

I find it difficult to believe that you really think this. You think we Muslims haven’t heard it all? People are unbelievably rude to Muslims all the time, but there are very few times that some Muslims become unhinged. Why would you want to denigrate the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in front of Muslims in the first place? Would you like Muslims to denigrate your religion or prophets? (In fact, we wouldn’t as we revere all prophets (pbut).) Do unto others? Isn’t that the appropriate response for such impulses?

PS What about the case of those who belong to non-Abrahamic religions e.g. Hinduism and Buddhism. The Koran treats them lesser than Jews and Christians?

Neither Hinduism nor Buddhism is mentioned in the Qur’an so there’s no treating “them lesser than Jews and Christians,” at least from a Qur’anic standpoint. Of course we Muslims don’t accept their beliefs, but I’m sure they feel the same way toward us. No matter. That doesn’t mean that Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus can’t get along (along with Christians and Jews). Personally, I’ve had friends of all five faiths. Living in S’pore as I do, I’ve worked with a lot of Buddhists and Hindus (as well as many Christians and Muslims; there aren’t a lot of Jews here). I’ve visited a number of Hindu and Buddhist temples over the years as well. Do unto others. Respect for everyone, even if you don’t agree with their beliefs.

They have the audacity to believe that the Quran is here to be “politically correct” and any verse openly criticizing the Jews and Christians must be removed. For example, the Verse denying Jesus’s Crucifixion was removed from their Reformed Quran!

They think that the Quran should be a book that should have all of it’s violent verses thrown away…..but when you look into the Bible, all of the intolerant and murderous verses are still there intact! So why don’t I see people lobbying to have these passages removed?

These people will never succeed. I hope Allah Destroys them for Trying to reform the Quran….

I do hope this is right, but I haven’t encountered such a dialog before. Nobody can say what he really thinks of Muhammad or Islam to devout Muslims without expecting grave repercussions.
PS What about the case of those who belong to non-Abrahamic religions e.g. Hinduism and Buddhism. The Koran treats them lesser than Jews and Christians?

I find it ironic that you should write this because that’s precisely what you’ve been doing. I’m not interested in a pissing match to list the abuses peoples of various religions have suffered from the hands of people of other religions. Nor am I interested in trying to excuse people of my own faith from the bad things they’ve said or done against people of other religions. I’m not going to refer to them as “atheists” or claim they were misquoted. But if you can’t see that your own co-religionists have flaws, having instigated (purposefully or not) their own problems, then perhaps you’re not worth talking to.

…but did these schools of thought become rigid during the Early Caliphate period? I seem to remember that it was a time when open dialog between Christianity, Judaism, and Islam was allowed.

Open dialog between Christianity, Judaism and Islam has always been allowed; the schools of thought have never been rigid (the so-called “closure of the gates of ijtihad” is a myth).

Please don’t confuse the victims with the perpetrators. Sympathy should be extended to the ones who suffer and not to those who made them suffer. The majority of these victims are innocent, and got mixed into the fray because they refuse to become Muslim in Muslim held lands. And what do Muslims have against Christians and Jews anyway? Perhaps not a few atheists made the Muhammad drawings yet churches got burned. The Pope was quoted out of context, and not a few churches and practitioners who do not recognize him got burned. And to think these perpetrators claim to be practitioners of the most logical and peaceful religion on Earth.

No, it’s that the extremists need to return to the orthodox interpretations of the Qur’an as espoused by the five primary madhhab (schools of thought). These madhhab are your “more liberal” interpreters of the Qur’an.

I don’t exactly know the historic timeline of the evolution of Islam, but did these schools of thought become rigid during the Early Caliphate period? I seem to remember that it was a time when open dialog between Christianity, Judaism, and Islam was allowed. I believe Arabic science, architecture, and medicine thrived because a modicum of the freedom of conscience was practiced. Compare this to the Dark Ages of Europe, where only Catholicism was allowed, and you get the picture.
Returning to the Islam as practiced in olden times, albeit with complete freedom of conscience, would solve the terrorism crisis and allow minorities in Muslim held lands to lead better lives.

So sorry, but as you yourself said, you’ve never read the Qur’an; you’re not in a position to judge whether “accepting the Qur’an to the letter” … “breeds terrorism.” In fact, I would suggest that it’s the exact opposite, that not accepting the Qur’an “to the letter” breeds terrorism. Don’t make the mistake of judging Islam and Muslims by the same criterion you would judge the Bible and Christians.

One minor remark from any source against Muhammad, the Koran, or Islam in general; could incite church burnings, killing of Christians and Jews, and burning of their establishments.

Yes, unfortunately, this does tend to be true; on the other hand, it’s equally unfortunate that non-Muslims keep making irresponsible comments about Muhammad (pbuh), the Qur’an and Islam. A lot of non-Muslims just don’t know when to keep their mouth shut.

If Muslims are to show to the world that their religion is a religion of peace, then they must show it with their actions and not their words. Let the fruit show the evidence of the quality of the tree from whence it came from.

The vast majority of Muslims show that Islam is a religion of peace through their actions (and words); the same can be said for people of most other religions. Likewise, the same criticism can be applied to all other religions as well. Best to cast that log out of your own eye first.

Changing the Koran, on the other hand, would produce a different Islam from the Islam of history.

Pipe dream; ain’t gonna happen. No Muslim would ever accept an edited “Qur’an.” See my comment above regarding verse 3:7. “And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: ‘We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our lord:’” An edited “Qur’an” is not the Qur’an; a person who accepts an edited “Qur’an” is not a Muslim.

Perhaps a more liberal interpretation of the Koran is needed…

No, it’s that the extremists need to return to the orthodox interpretations of the Qur’an as espoused by the five primary madhhab (schools of thought). These madhhab are your “more liberal” interpreters of the Qur’an.

If the Moderates don’t fight against their Fundamentalist brethren, Fundamentalist Islam would win the soul of world Islam. It will then be only a matter of time before the rest of the world realizes that Fundamentalist Islam seeks its total annihilation. A resulting worldwide jihad wouldn’t be surprising.

Fearmongering doesn’t impress.

They have no authority to change the Qur’an whatsoever. The Qur’an warns against this type of “editing”:

And there are among them illiterates, who know not the Book, but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture. Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say: “This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby. (2:78-79)

Muslims accept the entire Qur’an as it is, not bits and pieces of it. To deny any part of the Qur’an is to deny Islam; i.e., they are not Muslim.

He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book: In it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book: others are allegorical. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our lord:” and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding. (3:7)

You have to beware of people like “reformislam.” They may claim to be Muslim, but their whole M.O. is to deceive non-Muslims by exploiting a popular non-Muslim prejudice: “Why can’t Muslims be like us?” Islam is not going to be “reformed” in a way non-Muslims want; Islam is going to remain the way it is (or it wouldn’t be Islam). Anyone who tells you differently is selling you snake oil.