Be a Supporter!
ADR3-N
ADR3-N
  • Member since: Sep. 3, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 24
Musician
Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-07 21:07:09 Reply

So yeah, you (and those anti-Sharia cronies) want to bitch about Sharia law in America? Prove it, or else you can stop whining when people say the anti-facists are correct in calling the anti-Sharia protestors pieces of trash.

I wasn't going to respond to this. It's been a bit and the Antifa thread has been derailed enough, but I realized, most people have no clue about Sharia in America.

If it's not name-calling, it's not doing research, being proven wrong, then cherry-picking articles to avoid embarrassment before retreating back to High-Horse castle again, which is usually equal parts sand and ignorance. But muckraking is usually how /pol/ goes. Take it with a grain of... salt.

For the interested, I'll respond to @Gario's post, and we can go from there.

Sharia is Islamic case and religious law, above man-made law, package-deal with Islam, Quran 5:48. Based on the principle, "W.W.M.D?" it derives from the Quran, Sunna, and Hadith. From cleaning your butt after a poo to killing apostates, it is a true product of 7th-century cultist Muhammad and his banditos.

We know Sharia advocates and apologists exist ofc. What I seek to make plain is Sharia is being practiced in America today, it is contrary to American jurisprudence and human decency, and a free democracy has no business sanctioning such backward bs.

I will provide lots of links since @Gario was sad that he had to Google something earlier. :(

Sharia in Texas

that thing in Texas in 2015 (which you conveniently didn't link to)? It was 100% voluntary, and the group claimed no ability to supercede existing local, state or federal laws.

That "voluntary" tribunal openly admitted in the same article linked that where Sharia and US law conflict, Sharia will be followed, and declined comment on what would happen if its rulings were not followed.

If I had to guess, death penalty. Sharia is the will of Muhammad and Allah. You're a hypocrite if you don't submit, and the penalty for hypocrisy is death. Sura 9:73. Remember, Islam is a cult.

Related, honor killings in America. A well-known case is Yaser Abdel Said, the cab driver who shot his daughters dead for dating non-Muslims and refusing an arranged marriage. Headlines ofc avoid calling this an Islamic honor killing, but in Islam, honor killers are heroes. Yep, that's Sharia for ya.

But the Sharia court never said it would go that far, you might say! Well, we know according to Quran 2:225, Allah doesn't hold Muslims to what they swear half-heartedly, but what they actually believe. You honestly think a devout Muslim who knows the Islamic sources well enough to officiate Sharia court doesn't believe in it?

Reliance of the Traveler, the comprehensive Sharia authority, p. 746 - 8.2, Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. And the rest need not be said, especially when the aim is to get Sharia in America. Just like the UK's blasphemy law.

To top it off, the 4 "lawyers" for the Islamic Tribunal were unlicensed. How can we be sure the law is being observed in Sharia courts if you don't even have to have a law degree to practice there, and bearing in mind Allah's multiple calls to deception?

Should Sharia be a Protected Religious Freedom?

In other words, that's practicing a religion, which the Constitution protects - no different than an Amish family establishing rules to guide their lives.

Let's read a little article, which claims we need Sharia for divorces but admits:
a wife sought a restraining order against her husband, alleging that he repeatedly beat and sexually assaulted her.

At the trial, the husband presented an imam who testified that, in Islam, husbands have the right to expect sex whenever they want. The judge concluded that because the husband had no criminal intent and was only following his religious beliefs, there was no crime, and did not grant the restraining order.

The ruling was wrong under both Shariah and New Jersey law, lawyers said; a New Jersey appellate court reversed the decision in 2010.

"It's not rape, it's religious freedom!" See how ridiculous that sounds in the real world? Remember, Sharia prosecutes rape victims too. Google dog dare ya.

The article continues, but instead of going to Islam's sources and pointing out how the Quran says "Your wives are a tilth for you, so come to your tilth however you wish,", and the Islamic sources support forcing your wife to have sex, and if your wife doesn't "obey devoutly", you can beat her, Sura 4:34 -- the author says we need Sharia because Muslims need to conduct their marriages Islamically.

Wow. Guess what? We have prenuptials for that. The legal stuff at least.

But Sharia law is more than marriage and dowry. It's death to apostates, polygamy, pedophilia, denying divorce for battered women -- and marital autonomy, to name a few. Women and disbelievers have NO rights in Islam. In not denouncing Sharia, you trash human rights, religious freedom, and American jurisprudence.

Moving on.

Sharia Enforced by Dearborn, MI
Video proof, Sharia obstructs free speech. Testimony, honor murders swept under the rug.

Here. A bunch of police surround Christians for passing out a pamphlet and take them into custody.

Another. Christians set up, assaulted by security, treated to police car ride for asking about info on a Mulsim pamphlet at a booth inviting people to ask questions about Islam.

Here's where they were arrested and charged with breach of peace for engaging with very interested Muslims. Arrest happens after 17:20.

Christians can't stand on public property to exercise free speech without permit. Applying for one gets you arrested. Here.

And in the police report for at least one of these incidents, the Christians were accused of trying to start a riot.

Details on arrests here. Select quote below.

On a horrifying note, one of the police officers in the jail told us that there are honor killings in Dearborn but that they get covered up by the police department. He said that he had walked into houses where girls had been beheaded or had had their throats slit. (But check the local newspapers. You won't find any mention of these crimes.) The officer told us that some of the officers in the department support what we're doing.

Yup, that's Sharia. Now let's revisit why I'm here.

So yeah, you (and those anti-Sharia cronies) want to bitch about Sharia law in America? Prove it, or else you can stop whining when people say the anti-facists are correct in calling the anti-Sharia protestors pieces of trash.

But I don't think he cares. Like Sharia advocates, most people these days like calling anyone who isn't their definition of tolerant an ignorant piece of trash so much they can't see how allowing the religious case law of a 7th century mass murdering false prophet to flourish in our borders is not just STUPID, it borders on ludicrous.

More comprehensive list for Sharia here. Free Reliance of the Traveler PDF is gone sadly.

Discuss.

Gario
Gario
  • Member since: Jul. 30, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Musician
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-08 00:02:52 (edited 2017-12-08 00:03:45) Reply

Haven't read the thread yet, but when I have time I'll at least give one response since it's more or less directed at me.

Just giving a courtesy post to acknowledge I see this.


Need some music for a flash or game? Check it out. If none of this works send me a PM, I'm taking requests.

ADR3-N
ADR3-N
  • Member since: Sep. 3, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 24
Musician
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-08 02:14:10 Reply

At 12/8/17 12:02 AM, Gario wrote: Haven't read the thread yet, but when I have time I'll at least give one response since it's more or less directed at me.

Not just you, but I did want to address your points, yeah -- and not derail the thread in case you wanted to discuss further. Also felt like this was a legal/political issue and we didn't really have a dedicated thread for it despite it getting dragged into other discussions. Looking forward to your responses. Take multiples if you need. I would have added another section but was strained for characters with all the links.

I don't take any of this stuff personally btw. I'm just passionate about Sharia and women's rights, free speech, and religious freedom, since both affect me directly as a woman, a non-Muslim, and a Christian, in that order, lol. And I talk a freaking lot. So reeeally big on free speech. :P

Just giving a courtesy post to acknowledge I see this.

Thanks. I appreciate it. I'm going to bed after the usual duties and a few lectures. See ya around. :)

EdyKel
EdyKel
  • Member since: Dec. 11, 2009
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 26
Gamer
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-08 16:42:03 Reply

I'll just post this here, since it was getting way off topic in the other thread about Trump.

At 12/8/17 03:28 AM, ADR3-N wrote:
At 12/8/17 01:51 AM, EdyKel wrote: Anyone can cherry pick the shit out of things to make a case against something.
You have to be uprooting the whole cherry tree by this point to malign Christianity while condoning and outright ignoring the open-ended commands of Islam. If you think I'm wrong, I want to see sources from now on. So far all you've provided is your opinions, all of which have consistently been proven contrary to reality. And the reality is, the Islamic nations historically have a history of jihad and non-compromise concerning Israel.

The trees has already been uprooted. I can even point to a tree that been uprooted by Christians to malign other sects of Christianity. All you have supplied is a one sided narrative that is full of opinion, and selected facts.

Your whole post sounded like something that would be akin to a Nazi writing about all the evils of Jews. I know you despise Muslims. I get it.
The Islamophobia ad hominem, the race card's cousin, used to shut down discussion, ignore facts, and avoid addressing arguments -- we meet again.

What discussion? All you have done is created a negative narrative about Muslims, while accusing others of shutting down a discussion which you have no interest in having, or changing your mind on, no matter the facts.

Well, there's a little problem here. My Bible says there is neither Jew nor Greek. Gal 3:28. And I'm sure that doesn't just apply to race, since Greek gentiles were very multi-racial, multi-cultural, and varying degrees of polytheistic, for the most part. Unlike whoever hurt your feelings, I try to follow Jesus. ;)

It all falls into the same pot, where you have people who hate other groups, for a wide range of reasons, while promoting their negative propaganda and hate towards them, while elevating their own groups as being better. What's not to understand? All I see is you trying to get around these things by making excuses for why it not what it is: hate.

Tell me something. The Quran tells us to slay the unbeliever wherever we find them, Sura 9:5, and no one bats an eye when non-believers are murdered around the world, but keep plugging the same "evil" Christian Islamophobe line, meanwhile the Bible you malign constantly tells us things like "love your enemies; pray for them that despitefully use you." Matt 5:44, Luke 6:28. Why do you ignore one in favor of the other?

And yet, 99% of the Muslim population don't kill non-believers, because killing is illegal, even among many Muslim countries, and most of them are quite moral, despite certain verses in the Quran. Perhaps, I should post a few choice bible verses that would depict Christians as barbarians by our privileged standards? But, I've been down that road with you as you slither your way around them, unable to come to terms with that shit, and making excuse for them. And I don't malign the bible, only Christians who make excuses for for those versus, or do things that are clearly immoral, do all the work for me.

It seems like you just have a problem with not just Christians but those that call you on your own prejudice. I just don't know why you oppose me, since the only difference between me and a generic Sharia advocate is that I believe you have the right to free speech, and an Islamic way of life shouldn't be forced upon you or anyone.

Just the immoral ones, or the ones who hide behind a bible, and refuse to see all the immorality done by many of their fellow Christians, present and past. Besides, I grew up as a Methodist, and then became more of a deist later on, because of people like you who made me question it. I also have family that is devote Christians, and go to service every Sunday.I also have a cousin who married into a Jewish family, who's wife and daughter are practicing Jews. An I also have known a few people who were Muslims, and they were good people. So, I really don't hate any religion, just the people who display immoral behavior, or attack either with violence, or prejudice, against other groups - or refuse to see the suffering they cause - while telling others how moral and righteous they are.

And then there are the problems over Israel, and he Middle East, which will suck this country, and others, into a religious dispute - where all sides use each other as evidence of violence and oppression towards them.

ADR3-N
ADR3-N
  • Member since: Sep. 3, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 24
Musician
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-09 04:48:43 Reply

At 12/8/17 04:42 PM, EdyKel wrote: I'll just post this here, since it was getting way off topic

Thanks.

All you have done is created a negative narrative about Muslims, while accusing others of shutting down a discussion which you have no interest in having, or changing your mind on, no matter the facts.

Interest I have plenty, but not to pretend Islam doesn't teach what it does, or that sharia, jihad, and antisemitism aren't real problems rooted in Islamic theology. That's fact. :)

you have people who hate other groups, for a wide range of reasons, while promoting their negative propaganda and hate towards them, while elevating their own groups as being better. What's not to understand?
All I see is you trying to get around these things by making excuses for why it not what it is: hate.

You still seem to be confusing Muslims with Islam. Muslims are religious; Islam is a religion. Two different things.

Like Christianity, Islam has been reformed, but instead of returning to the peace of Jesus and salvation by faith alone via Protestant Reformation, Islam returned to the violence of Muhammad through Wahhabism, salvation by deeds alone, especially jihad. 9:111, 22:58-59

yet, 99% of the Muslim population don't kill non-believers

Not all Muslims are violent jihadis, though Islam demands jihad, genocide, and subjugation of non-Muslims. Muslims can be wonderful, law-abiding citizens, but this is contrary to Islam, not because of it.

Sura 2:216, Fighting is prescribed for you while it is hateful to you. But perhaps you hate a thing and it is good for you; and perhaps you love a thing and it is bad for you. And Allah Knows, while you know not.

Many cite Sura 4:92-95 to "prove" Muslims aren't real Muslims if they kill Muslims, but Allah commands jihad against infidels AND Muslim hypocrites, Sura 9:73.

How does Islam define hypocrisy? Sura 9 spends a lot of time on it; understandable, since Sura 9 was, according to the classical narrative, revealed during Muhammad's many military campaigns in his last 8 years of life. Hypocrites show fear of death, 9:56-57; reluctance to jihad, 9:44-45, and friendliness toward unbelievers, 9:67.

This is a recipe for a bloodbath, which is what we have seen for 1400+ years.

Perhaps, I should post a few choice bible verses

Sure, go ahead, in a new thread please. :)

Just the immoral ones, or the ones who hide behind a bible, and refuse to see all the immorality done by many of their fellow Christians, present and past.

I see it. I condemn it. So does the Bible.

I grew up as a Methodist, and then became more of a deist later on, because of people like you who made me question it. I also have family that is devote Christians, and go to service every Sunday. I also have a cousin who married into a Jewish family, who's wife and daughter are practicing Jews. An I also have known a few people who were Muslims, and they were good people. So, I really don't hate any religion, just the people who display immoral behavior, or attack either with violence, or prejudice, against other groups - or refuse to see the suffering they cause - while telling others how moral and righteous they are.

Again, you seem to confuse Christians with Christianity, the theist with his branch of theism. The measure of a religion is less its modern practitioners and more what it, in its purest form, tells us to practice.

Islam is bad, not individual Muslims, who either do what it says, or don't. Muslims on both sides conduct their lives in the way they believe is right. I can't fault them for that; I can fault Islamic theology and law, which are not peaceful, good, or fit for any free society.

And then there are the problems over Israel, and he Middle East, which will suck this country, and others, into a religious dispute

I'm not gonna be PC here. Islam has open-ended commands like sura 9:5 and sura 9:29 -- which are wound up in Muhammad's last will and testament to Muslims, Quran Sura 9.

9, the most violent chapter by far, commands the deaths of unbelievers, the breaking of treaties, etc. When I see Islamic nations in the middle east, Al Qaeda, IS, the Taliban, Hamas, and the PLO following Islam, I don't conclude their people are the root of the evil; on the contrary, Islam is.

To hear you talk, I feel like you never understood the Bible and your faith was blind. No offense. That or you were surrounded by people who had little concept of their theology and were just keeping up appearances. We all know 'em; we're stuck with 'em, unfortunate though it may be.

I wasn't raised Christian, despite my family. I prayed some. Went to church some, never seriously. Never cared before I graduated college over a decade later. I hated it actually -- for judging me, a liar, thief, sociopath, trans person, agnostic, near atheist, gay. Hated lots of things ofc: myself, and God; drank heavily, smoked pot, slept around -- started fights for shiggles. Maybe still do verbally.

What changed my mind was Jesus, a historical person who suffered severe physical and psychological torture, believed he was dying for me -- his followers martyred for believing it too. It grew harder and harder to make excuses for my unbelief the more I researched Biblical criticism (atheistic, no less!) until finally, the Shroud of Turin and Sudarium of Oviedo made the difference, and after 22 years of life I prayed the most agnostic prayer ever and surrendered to Christ. Seriously tho, the research on the Shroud is awesome stuff.

But let's wrap this up.

As the topic is not the Bible but Sharia, I'll try not to waste much time, but I will drop a 50 min lecture, w/ timestamps for your convenience. Wanna discuss? Please make a new topic and @ me. :)

After watching, it should be clear the Biblical text has been being unfairly misrepresented for the sake of rhetoric.

Bonus Lecture:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bksANxAv2JA

0. - 00:48 - What you'd probably like me to believe.

1. 02:05 - Strange passages in O.T.; the problem of evil. Takeaway, unlike other gods, YHVH doesn't rebuke those who question him.

2. 04:10 - On N.T. mercy vs. O.T. wrath. Takeaway, justice and mercy clothe both texts; praying for your enemies and doing good to them is found in BOTH. I keep stressing this, but someone keeps missing it and maligning Christians. :P

3. 09:50 - Context of Mosaic law vs. the ancient world. Lots of our western values proceed out of the values established from O.T. ethics, carried through the N.T.

4. 16:15 - Dynamics of Israeli law and morality; not all of the commands in the Bible were open-ended, unlike those of Muhammad and Allah, and not all are universal. Unlike the nations of Canaan, Israelis were not to sacrifice babies to idols, rape, or enslave.

5. 23:06 - Israel's warfare was not genocidal. Ancient near eastern texts use similar language. All the Canaanite nations they fought survive, often to live among the Israelites, right after being "completely destroyed."

6. 40:50 - The misconceptions of "slavery" and racism in the O.T. Slavery only is used once therein, inserted by a later translator. Christopher Right, O.T. scholar: "The slave [in the Old Testament] was given human and legal rights unheard of in its contemporary societies."

Note, it was not the trans-Atlantic slavery we saw hundreds of years ago, where slaves had no rights, OR the Islamic slavery we have been seeing for 1400 years, where 95% of the African men enslaved by Islam died from their castration wounds, and thus we see virtually none of their progeny.

New research on Islamic slavery here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yleHVnkvi1E

If you want to be consistent, criticize Islam too, especially slavery, your pet issue. If you're honest, you will concede Islam deserves it.

ADR3-N
ADR3-N
  • Member since: Sep. 3, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 24
Musician
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-09 04:50:33 Reply

Ran out of characters.

At 12/8/17 03:17 AM, nerosmoke wrote: I don't have a problem with sharia. or the left. but the one thing about this I do like with sharia is the left (gays/transgender/minorities/feminist/antifa groups) are thrown off roofs by the sharia groups.

That's actually one thing I really hate. And it's really ironic. Leftists often support sharia, but sharia would have the left killed for not following sharia. :/

Also good job to OP for the long thought out post. I will be following this thread.

Thanks. I try. Screw this character limit though.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-09 15:00:28 Reply

I have never really understood the fear and furor over Sharia. How someone wants to conduct their own life is up to them. Also, I find it odd that religion seeping into and in some cases overriding law is only an issue when Muslims do it.

There are thousands of cases where Christians openly choose their religious rules over the rule of law and so on, yet those who claim to hate Sharia love it.

I don't feel like waxing on, but my view in short is a combination of "much ado about nothing" and something about glass houses and stones. Dog whistle + blatant and willfully blind hypocrisy = me not giving a shit about the issue.

SamPercy
SamPercy
  • Member since: Jun. 28, 2017
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Supporter
Level 02
Reader
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-09 15:17:30 Reply

I can only speak on behalf of my country, Britain, and that if there has ever been cases where serious domestic cases and legal cases are brought to sharia courts, its not out of any "respect" for an outdated legal system, but merely a way for our government to make up for shortcomings in our services towards society, relying upon external, unregulated groups to perform such matters (although, I imagine they do have rules which they follow)

but for the most part, they are usually just cultural, thats what they do when encountering difficulties, they go to an adviser, only that if there are cases of female discrimination, it is because of our governments reluctance to investigate and regulate such matters, casting it as either "you either have it, and all the ills of its unregulatedness, or we vilify it and call it incompatible with our culture, because thats easier than us having to do anything about it"

But when it comes to it, I will covert my neighbours oxen whether I like to or not, that's my concern, not the concern of a bearded man rolling around on a play mat


criticise, but do not demonise

EdyKel
EdyKel
  • Member since: Dec. 11, 2009
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 26
Gamer
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-10 13:05:09 Reply

At 12/9/17 04:48 AM, ADR3-N wrote:
At 12/8/17 04:42 PM, EdyKel wrote: All you have done is created a negative narrative about Muslims, while accusing others of shutting down a discussion which you have no interest in having, or changing your mind on, no matter the facts.
Interest I have plenty, but not to pretend Islam doesn't teach what it does, or that sharia, jihad, and antisemitism aren't real problems rooted in Islamic theology. That's fact. :)

And the history of Christianity is not much different, now is it. Plenty of examples of Christian crusades, extermination of other religions, persecution of other religions and groups.... And this is not even counting the persecution, and conflicts, among the Christian sects towards each other. You could say that it's very much ingrained for Christians to attack other religions, and those who diverge from their interpretation of the bible. After all, The bible claims that there is only one true god, and that Christ is the only true way. It does not accept other gods, or other religions. And then you get Christians splintering off to form their own sects, because they differ in their own interpretations of the bible from other christian denominations... So, instead of uniting, instead of showing compassion, instead of working together, which Christian often claim about their religion, they have done the exact opposite...

Even you don't seem accept other groups of Christians, as you often promote your own christian sect over other sects of it - when your not outright calling other Christians fake. Not to mention how you go after other religions like Islam, or Muslims, as if you are tying to make it look worse in comparison to the failing within your own religious community.

And that leads me to the following....

you have people who hate other groups, for a wide range of reasons, while promoting their negative propaganda and hate towards them, while elevating their own groups as being better. What's not to understand?
All I see is you trying to get around these things by making excuses for why it not what it is: hate.
You still seem to be confusing Muslims with Islam. Muslims are religious; Islam is a religion. Two different things.

Son, I'm not much for word games. I have little patience with those who try to give me the run around by trying to be cute. You are treating theses things as if they were the same, by generalizing, and stereotyping, the hell out of them. You have not gone out your your way to really make no real effort to distinguish them. All you have done is say if their one thing they are that way, because of it.

As for your argument about the religion, it all comes down to interpretation over the religious text. You only think in two dimensional ways, son. And it's all self centered and shallow. You think there is only one interpretation, yours. You have one for the Bible and another for the Quran. The one you have for the Bible is full of all sort of wonderfulness, and your one for the Quran is all doom and gloom. And in both cases you cherry pick the hell out of them, with your biased views over them, deciding what parts ti take literally, figuratively, or ignore entirely. It doesn't take much to see this shit, that you are nowhere capable of have a non-objective view over them witch taints your conclusion over them.

And then that leads us to all this shit...

Perhaps, I should post a few choice bible verses
Sure, go ahead, in a new thread please. :)

I already did, you made a lot of excuses for them, or you never responded back.

Anyways, I'll just post this.

Just the immoral ones, or the ones who hide behind a bible, and refuse to see all the immorality done by many of their fellow Christians, present and past.
I see it. I condemn it. So does the Bible.

We been down this road before. You basically defended the verse about slavery in the bible, while deflecting from the fact that protestant Christians owned slaves in this country, while going after it when it's done by Muslims. You also seem quite about Christians who support Trump, while accusing Obama of being anti-christian because he admonishes Christians for their views on gays, and forcing them to pay for women birth control that over 90% of Christian women use.

I grew up as a Methodist, and then became more of a deist later on, because of people like you who made me question it. I also have family that is devote Christians, and go to service every Sunday. I also have a cousin who married into a Jewish family, who's wife and daughter are practicing Jews. An I also have known a few people who were Muslims, and they were good people. So, I really don't hate any religion, just the people who display immoral behavior, or attack either with violence, or prejudice, against other groups - or refuse to see the suffering they cause - while telling others how moral and righteous they are.
Again, you seem to confuse Christians with Christianity, the theist with his branch of theism. The measure of a religion is less its modern practitioners and more what it, in its purest form, tells us to practice.

I'm not confusing anything. All I see from you is a mountain excuses, and bigotry.

Basically, you come off as some religious zealot, man, who makes up a lot shit up, hoping some of it will stick. It's like you are trying to smother your opponent with large quantities of shit to win your argument, when you have no quality in it.

I'm fucking agnostic about this shit, and I don't really care about religion, as long as it doesn't afect me. As long as people get along that all that matters to me. I don't care who started it, or who fault it is, that shit just sounds like something kids say.

The rest of your stuff I vaguely looked at but it really didn't capture my attention, and I really don't know what you were going on about.... I guess it's more cherry picking and one sided nonsense. I'm looking for quality, not quantity or BS, in discussions.

Ghoti
Ghoti
  • Member since: May. 14, 2014
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 07
Musician
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-10 16:15:04 Reply

Religion is one thing, and religious extremism is another. Can't blame all Catholics for beheading Charles I. Can't blame all Protestants for Salem Witch Trials.

You're making gross generalizations about vast amounts of people.


I carry your heart. I carry it in my heart.

BBS Signature
GXFICH
GXFICH
  • Member since: Aug. 24, 2016
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 07
Blank Slate
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-11 16:06:03 (edited 2017-12-11 16:11:48) Reply

Sharia is highly open to interpretation, each verse of islamic text has to be put in context of all the other verses which are in themselves often highly open to interpretation.
you may find this article interesting (you may think it`s too partisan but then so were the links you provided).

It is really not as simple as saying sharia says this or sharia says that based on a few cherry picked quotations (like you did).
And at the end of the day Muslims are going to follow sharia law no matter what because that is what they believe in, so unless you want to exile, kill or forcibly repress every Muslim in america (which I sincerely hope you don`t ) you`re going to have to deal with it.

That said it is not just the "tiny radical minority" that hold views unacceptable to western morality although there are a large number of liberal Muslims they are when compared to the total number of Muslims in the world are a minority themselves and not a particularly large minority either...

l think this is a suitably suitable video on the subject.


Let's read a little article, which claims we need Sharia for divorces but admits:
a wife sought a restraining order against her husband, alleging that he repeatedly beat and sexually assaulted her.

At the trial, the husband presented an imam who testified that, in Islam, husbands have the right to expect sex whenever they want. The judge concluded that because the husband had no criminal intent and was only following his religious beliefs, there was no crime, and did not grant the restraining order.

Also I agree shit like this is a problem

At 12/10/17 01:05 PM, EdyKel wrote:
And the history of Christianity is not much different, now is it. Plenty of examples of Christian crusades, extermination of other religions, persecution of other religions and groups....

Not up to the 21st century unlike Islam unfortunately.


as you often promote your own christian sect over other sects of it

You promote your own world view over everyone elses and so to a certain extent does everyone .


You still seem to be confusing Muslims with Islam. Muslims are religious; Islam is a religion. Two different things.
Son, I'm not much for word games.I have little patience with those who try to give me the run around by trying to be cute.

You have no patience for those who say they don`t hate muslims because there trying to be cute?
I wouldn`t have got involved but that really gets me.

and by your logic :


You still seem to be confusing leprosy with lepers. lepers are afflicted; leprosy is a disease. Two different things.
Son, I'm not much for word games

(Just for the record I`m not saying islam is like leprosy or anything, just a graphic example is better. )


It doesn't take much to see this shit, that you are nowhere capable of have a non-objective view over them witch taints your conclusion over them.

The same could very well be said about you.


I'm fucking agnostic about this shit, and I don't really care about religion, as long as it doesn't afect me. As long as people get along that all that matters to me.

As a significant proportion of our respective societies are made up of people from different cultures how they are treated by the law and society in general must inevitably have far reaching effects upon our societies and culture and therefore on you.

Also attitudes can change so much in a few generations, unless differences between muslims and non-muslims can be permanently settled that in 100 or so years there`s nothing to say that we won`t be having a myanmar style exedous of our own.


BBS Signature
EdyKel
EdyKel
  • Member since: Dec. 11, 2009
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 26
Gamer
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-11 19:05:34 Reply

At 12/11/17 04:06 PM, GXFICH wrote:
At 12/10/17 01:05 PM, EdyKel wrote:
And the history of Christianity is not much different, now is it. Plenty of examples of Christian crusades, extermination of other religions, persecution of other religions and groups....
Not up to the 21st century unlike Islam unfortunately.

What parts of the world are you talking about? It's easy to generalize shit. You mean the Middle east, who were pretty much becoming westernized until 50 years ago. Then we had the creation of Israel, the foreign interference by Russia and Western powers in the region, and the wars that lead to countless innocent civilians being killed by indiscriminate bombings, vast lost of infrastructure and homes, control by foreign powers.... All this led to the rise of Muslim extremists - which is what most people focouse on when they think about Muslims not being part of the 21st century, while failing to recognize that a lot of them live with constant wars, and don't have the luxuries that western countries currently enjoy, such as schooling, health services, good jobs, and security. And All this has lead to resentment and anger, which are just ripe for extremists to recruit with, and gain power, and who use western powers, and Israel, and other religions, as lightening rods for their cause.

Also, I'll post this again, since you may not have read it.

as you often promote your own christian sect over other sects of it
You promote your own world view over everyone elses and so to a certain extent does everyone .

It's part of a much larger argument between us that goes well beyond this topic.

You still seem to be confusing Muslims with Islam. Muslims are religious; Islam is a religion. Two different things.
Son, I'm not much for word games.I have little patience with those who try to give me the run around by trying to be cute.
You have no patience for those who say they don`t hate muslims because there trying to be cute?
I wouldn`t have got involved but that really gets me.
and by your logic :


You still seem to be confusing leprosy with lepers. lepers are afflicted; leprosy is a disease. Two different things.
Son, I'm not much for word games
(Just for the record I`m not saying islam is like leprosy or anything, just a graphic example is better. )

I think I made clear enough that I'm not for word games. We both know that one implies the other. You can''t be a leper without Leprosy, and leprosy leads to lepers. And indeed, your example is quite appropriate, considering that many people consider Islam a disease, and those affected by it, as diseased. So, what is their solution to a something they "consider" as "a problem" that affects millions of people? Kill them? Convert them? If you treat the religion as if it was some type of disease, then you must consider the people who are doing the consideration, and if they are no different than what they consider diseased.

Don't play these games with me, son.

It doesn't take much to see this shit, that you are nowhere capable of have a non-objective view over them witch taints your conclusion over them.
The same could very well be said about you.

Sure, but if you start arguing from that standpoint, without having anything to back it up with, other than wanting to say it to indicate you have a superior view, without realizing that, then you are no different that the argument you are making against another person. I believe this is a logic fallacy.

Anyways, I had to cut out most of his original post from that in that reply because most of it were selected examples, and verses from the Quran, which painted his whole argument as one sided, and non-objective. And it not limited to this topic, but several. he always attacking Muslims, and Islam, while playing word games.

I'm fucking agnostic about this shit, and I don't really care about religion, as long as it doesn't afect me. As long as people get along that all that matters to me.
As a significant proportion of our respective societies are made up of people from different cultures how they are treated by the law and society in general must inevitably have far reaching effects upon our societies and culture and therefore on you.

A better argument is how do I affect other people if I'm always telling people of other religions to knock off their bickering, and get along, while supporting policies and politicians who hold similar views - but are accused of being anti-religion because they don't cater to just their views? To many insecure Christian these days, who have that whole persecution complex going on, with little to show for.

Also attitudes can change so much in a few generations, unless differences between muslims and non-muslims can be permanently settled that in 100 or so years there`s nothing to say that we won`t be having a myanmar style exedous of our own.

You lost me there.

GXFICH
GXFICH
  • Member since: Aug. 24, 2016
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 07
Blank Slate
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-12 08:46:58 Reply

At 12/11/17 07:05 PM, EdyKel wrote:
At 12/11/17 04:06 PM, GXFICH wrote:
At 12/10/17 01:05 PM, EdyKel wrote:
And the history of Christianity is not much different, now is it. Plenty of examples of Christian crusades, extermination of other religions, persecution of other religions and groups....
Not up to the 21st century unlike Islam unfortunately.
What parts of the world are you talking about? It's easy to generalize shit. You mean the Middle east, who were pretty much becoming westernized until 50 years ago.

and pretty much colonised 60 years ago.


Then we had the creation of Israel, the foreign interference by Russia and Western powers in the region, and the wars that lead to countless innocent civilians being killed by indiscriminate bombings, vast lost of infrastructure and homes, control by foreign powers....

and before that all the ottoman and european empires did quite a good job of destabilising the region as well.


All this led to the rise of Muslim extremists -

hard line and extreme muslims came far before all that although I agree that if circumstances were different then they would be far less prominent although I was talking about what muslims believe not why they believe it.


which is what most people focouse on when they think about Muslims not being part of the 21st century,

in case you hadn`t seen it i think i`ll post this video that was included in my original post here

and a few more...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCQEmeGfFmY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJkFQohIKNI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytdMUddGe-U


You still seem to be confusing leprosy with lepers. lepers are afflicted; leprosy is a disease. Two different things.
Son, I'm not much for word games
(Just for the record I`m not saying islam is like leprosy or anything, just a graphic example is better. )
I think I made clear enough that I'm not for word games. We both know that one implies the other. You can''t be a leper without Leprosy, and leprosy leads to lepers.

So if you want to cure leprosy your`e bigoted against lepers?

It`s got nothing to do with word games it`s about what words actually mean
if a quarter of the world were Scientologists then would it be wrong to criticise their religion?


And indeed, your example is quite appropriate, considering that many people consider Islam a disease,

I am very aware of that which is why I clearly stated I was not one of them and that has nothing to do with what I said .


It doesn't take much to see this shit, that you are nowhere capable of have a non-objective view over them witch taints your conclusion over them.
The same could very well be said about you.
Sure, but if you start arguing from that standpoint, without having anything to back it up with,

Apart from all the stuff I wrote saying how I thought you were wrong yes.


I'm fucking agnostic about this shit, and I don't really care about religion, as long as it doesn't afect me. As long as people get along that all that matters to me.
As a significant proportion of our respective societies are made up of people from different cultures how they are treated by the law and society in general must inevitably have far reaching effects upon our societies and culture and therefore on you.
A better argument is how do I affect other people if I'm always telling people of other religions to knock off their bickering,

religions have been bickering for the past 5000 years I don`t think you would have much luck.


and get along, while supporting policies and politicians who hold similar views -

do those politicians want to bicker with muslims that want to force things questionable or unacceptable to modern standards or just turn a blind eye to anything muslims do? like this


BBS Signature
EdyKel
EdyKel
  • Member since: Dec. 11, 2009
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 26
Gamer
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-12 17:49:42 Reply

At 12/12/17 08:46 AM, GXFICH wrote:
At 12/11/17 07:05 PM, EdyKel wrote:
At 12/11/17 04:06 PM, GXFICH wrote:
At 12/10/17 01:05 PM, EdyKel wrote:
And the history of Christianity is not much different, now is it. Plenty of examples of Christian crusades, extermination of other religions, persecution of other religions and groups....
Not up to the 21st century unlike Islam unfortunately.
What parts of the world are you talking about? It's easy to generalize shit. You mean the Middle east, who were pretty much becoming westernized until 50 years ago.
and pretty much colonised 60 years ago.

And we are back to square one.

Then we had the creation of Israel, the foreign interference by Russia and Western powers in the region, and the wars that lead to countless innocent civilians being killed by indiscriminate bombings, vast lost of infrastructure and homes, control by foreign powers....
and before that all the ottoman and european empires did quite a good job of destabilising the region as well.

All this led to the rise of Muslim extremists -
hard line and extreme muslims came far before all that although I agree that if circumstances were different then they would be far less prominent although I was talking about what muslims believe not why they believe it.

And again, you haven't offered anything that really changes what creates extremism, or hardliners, other than indicating it's Islam, and it has nothing to do with the actions of foreign powers or Israel.

which is what most people focouse on when they think about Muslims not being part of the 21st century,
in case you hadn`t seen it i think i`ll post this video that was included in my original post here

and a few more...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCQEmeGfFmY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJkFQohIKNI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytdMUddGe-U

And what creates that again? It's like listening to hardliner Jews talking about bombing and invading Iran, while accusing the other of saying the same shit. That's all I fucking see these days. And you keep indicating it's Islam, not any other religions, or foreign interference, at fault.

Besides, if I want to see examples of local hardliners I will just watch the Alabama election, with Roy Moore talking about where the woman's place is, his gay, race, and non-christian religion, hating, and who believe that 9-11 was god's judgment against a sinful country. Hardliners don't inhabit just a particular religion, silly, they can inhabit any one of them.

Also, as for your links, that is certainly one point of view, and I am sure millions can share his views, wither or not they are Muslim. But it doesn't change the fact that there are plenty of hardliners in families who promote hatred of other religions. According to a public poll, about 1 in 9 people in the US sympathize with white nationalist and Neo-Nazis, as they exhibit religious hatred of some form towards non-christian groups. And the rise of hate crimes has risen to it's highest point since 9-11, against minority groups. Not to mention that far right groups in this country have tried to commit, or have committed, more terrorist acts than Muslims. I could link the links to all this shit, but I really don't feel up to finding them, since I don't get the feeling you are taking any of this very serious.

So if you want to cure leprosy your`e bigoted against lepers?
It`s got nothing to do with word games it`s about what words actually mean
if a quarter of the world were Scientologists then would it be wrong to criticise their religion?

I don't view any religion as a disease, and I also don't believe people should be shunned, or made outcast, because of a disorder they have. But, again, you, and many others, are treating a religion as if it was a disease, and spend more time shunning it, or proposing things that are often unrealistic, and cruel, to cure it with. Or just don't have a solution other than accusing it what you want it to be: "A punching bag for all the blame"

I'm not really taking a side in all this. I'm just pointing out an observation that their are circumstantial reasons that have lead to more Muslim hardliners and extremism, from just the usual shit that can tern anyone into a hardliner and extremist. I'm not condoning the atrocities, or hatred, from Muslims, just pointing out that all the reasons shouldn't be shouldered by them alone.

And indeed, your example is quite appropriate, considering that many people consider Islam a disease,
I am very aware of that which is why I clearly stated I was not one of them and that has nothing to do with what I said .
Apart from all the stuff I wrote saying how I thought you were wrong yes.

*Sigh

So far you really haven't shown that you have an argument worth a damn, other that being the very thing you're accusing me of being. This is just one huge logical fallacy that keep slapping you in the face.

I'm fucking agnostic about this shit, and I don't really care about religion, as long as it doesn't afect me. As long as people get along that all that matters to me.
As a significant proportion of our respective societies are made up of people from different cultures how they are treated by the law and society in general must inevitably have far reaching effects upon our societies and culture and therefore on you.
A better argument is how do I affect other people if I'm always telling people of other religions to knock off their bickering,
religions have been bickering for the past 5000 years I don`t think you would have much luck.

And yet, here we are, bickering over it, like millions of people already do. But the difference is, I'm not attacking other religions, like you are with Islam. I'm only pointing out shit that is already there, but is viewed as attacking, because it might mean that side is responsible, in some way,for current affairs, and why we have seen the rise of Muslim hardliners and extremist, which is a reprehensible thought and repulsive to think about, by the other side attacking Islam.

If you were a Muslim, verbally attacking another religion, I would do the same, and point out all the wrong shit that muslims have done to other religions. And I'm not playing devils' advocate, either, It's simply that I rather have religions get along than fight each other. It may be a foreign thought to some, but there are people who don't hate or love religion, but who just want them to get along the best they can.

and get along, while supporting policies and politicians who hold similar views -
do those politicians want to bicker with muslims that want to force things questionable or unacceptable to modern standards or just turn a blind eye to anything muslims do? like this

I'm not turning a bind eye. It's just not focused just on Muslims, and always making them out to be the scapegoat. There are plenty of things you can blame the Muslims for, but it would also be stupid to deny how foreign powers, and Israel, have affected the Middle East, and their culture. Personally, I rather they stop being the lightening rods, and perhaps the Muslim world will go through their own enlightenment, and progressive movements, like they were once heading towards, until they got distracted, bombed the shit out of, vilified by the West....

All you have shown me, son, is that you keep thinking in terms of good guys and bad guys, with your generic arguments, and way of thinking. The bad guys are the bad because they are bad. The good guys are the good guys, because they are good... That's just a one sided, and generic way, to argue and think about things.

GXFICH
GXFICH
  • Member since: Aug. 24, 2016
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 07
Blank Slate
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-13 09:54:07 (edited 2017-12-13 09:56:55) Reply

At 12/12/17 05:49 PM, EdyKel wrote:
At 12/12/17 08:46 AM, GXFICH wrote:

What parts of the world are you talking about? It's easy to generalize shit. You mean the Middle east, who were pretty much becoming westernized until 50 years ago.
and pretty much colonised 60 years ago.
And we are back to square one.

So you think colonialism is a good thing?


And again, you haven't offered anything that really changes what creates extremism, or hardliners,

The only thing that can really stop muslim extremism is reform from inside.


other than indicating it's Islam,

due to human nature any doctrine will be twisted and misinterpreted but I think the nature of Islam is far more inviting to viscous ideologies than most others so I don`t think it is fair to say the nature of Islam is not part of the problem.


and it has nothing to do with the actions of foreign powers or Israel.

I never said that in fact in my post I said the opposite
Sorry if I didn`t make myself clear.
although I doubt places like saudi arabia would be any more moderate without foreign interference in fact probably even more hard line


which is what most people focouse on when they think about Muslims not being part of the 21st century,
in case you hadn`t seen it i think i`ll post this video that was included in my original post here
And what creates that again?

I was (as you can see above) showing you what people mean by muslims not being part of the 21st century


It's like listening to hardliner Jews talking about bombing and invading Iran,

But what creates hardline Judaism ?


Besides, if I want to see examples of local hardliners I will just watch the Alabama election, with Roy Moore talking about where the woman's place is, his gay, race, and non-christian religion, hating,

If a large number of Alabamians immigrated to Pakistan then Pakistan would have to take measures to prevent the Pakistanis and Alabamans from isolating themselves from each other and creating a race war.

If a large number of Pakistanis immigrated to Alabama I don`t see why (to a far lesser extent obviously) the same principle shouldn`t apply


Hardliners don't inhabit just a particular religion, silly, they can inhabit any one of them.

I never said they did
I mean where did I say that?
you can`t just put words into my mouth like that.


But it doesn't change the fact that there are plenty of hardliners in families who promote hatred of other religions. According to a public poll, about 1 in 9 people in the US sympathize with white nationalist and Neo-Nazis, as they exhibit religious hatred of some form towards non-christian groups. And the rise of hate crimes has risen to it's highest point since 9-11, against minority groups.

So the solution to that is more muslim immigration and then to let them isolate themselves in groups so that they can cultivate there own hard-line ideologies?


Not to mention that far right groups in this country have tried to commit, or have committed, more terrorist acts than Muslims.

In proportion to the amount of right-wing groups and muslims?

and anyway what creates far-right terrorists ?


I don't view any religion as a disease,

You should feel very proud of yourself


and I also don't believe people should be shunned, or made outcast, because of a disorder they have.

even if it`s highly contagious?
but you're right enough word games


But, again, you, and many others, are treating a religion as if it was a disease,

I am?


and spend more time shunning it, or proposing things that are often unrealistic, and cruel, to cure it with.

I didn`t do any of those things


Or just don't have a solution other than accusing it what you want it to be:

I think it`s a complicated and sensitive issue so it requires a nuanced and sensitive solution and I really don`t now enough about it to offer one but if people are going to act like you are ie. ignoring the other side of the debate and putting words into their mouths then that`s not going to happen.


I'm not really taking a side in all this. I'm just pointing out an observation that their are circumstantial reasons that have lead to more Muslim hardliners and extremism,

and I agree...


religions have been bickering for the past 5000 years I don`t think you would have much luck.
And yet, here we are, bickering over it, like millions of people already do.

just Human nature


But the difference is, I'm not attacking other religions, like you are with Islam.

I`m not really attacking Islam but certain interpretations of Islam by certain muslims but however just because somthing is a religion it shouldn`t necessarily be above attack merely because it`s a religion.


I'm only pointing out shit that is already there, but is viewed as attacking,

that`s funny so am I !


BBS Signature
ADR3-N
ADR3-N
  • Member since: Sep. 3, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 24
Musician
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-13 15:53:39 Reply

Courtesy post here. Between depression and running on errands/dates, I've not checked back on this properly to type up a few points, but I will over the next day or two. :)

Also, @Gario, did you pull a rain check? Still looking forward to your reply.

EdyKel
EdyKel
  • Member since: Dec. 11, 2009
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 26
Gamer
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-14 02:00:37 Reply

At 12/13/17 09:54 AM, GXFICH wrote:
At 12/12/17 05:49 PM, EdyKel wrote:
So you think colonialism is a good thing?

That is rather a complicated issue. We live in different times now, where it certainly would be looked down upon - not to mention it could lead to large wars. And yes, I would be against it. But, what has happened in the past happened. It's no use trying to damn it, or create "what ifs". With that said, people shouldn't have selective memories about it. People often forget about the effects it had on the native, or indigenous, people, who were often displaced, and treated like shit, for a long time. They were often the biggest losers of colonialism, as was taken away and populated by foreign individuals, or decedents, while their natural resources exploited. But to outright deny colonialism would be just as bad, because it did create the world of today. And the people, whose ancestors immigrated to those colonies have just as much right to the those lands as to those who ancestors lived there for a far greater time.

But as for the Middle East, and the colonial power that once controlled it, we are still seeing the ripple effects of their decisions on the region, and it seems far from settled. I fear that another great world war will begin there.

And again, you haven't offered anything that really changes what creates extremism, or hardliners,
The only thing that can really stop muslim extremism is reform from inside.

That is easier said than done. We can't reform it. Only they can reform themselves. And we need to stop butting into the region, and making it worse, and then using it as an excuse to go back there and beat the shit out of them, take their resources, while vilifying them. It's a perpetual cycle that needs to end.

due to human nature any doctrine will be twisted and misinterpreted but I think the nature of Islam is far more inviting to viscous ideologies than most others so I don`t think it is fair to say the nature of Islam is not part of the problem.

I think I already told you in the other post that hardliners, and extremists, are not the result of any particular religion, they can come from any type of religion, due to their interpretation of the religious texts, or hatred, and anger, that leads them down that direction, either because they are full of themselves and don't like the direction that their society is going, or it's from external interference that affects them and their society/culture.

which is what most people focouse on when they think about Muslims not being part of the 21st century,
in case you hadn`t seen it i think i`ll post this video that was included in my original post here
And what creates that again?
I was (as you can see above) showing you what people mean by muslims not being part of the 21st century

I know what you meant, but you have to understand that your argument heavily relies on your own perspective of what the 21st century means, while making broad generalizations. It's incredibly complex. It's why I asked you what region in the world to help narrow it down a bit, because Muslim dominated countries can differ from one to other like night and day, from social, to economics, with the latter often affecting the former. And very few of them follow Sharia law.

And we have plenty of Christians sects, such as Amish, and Mennonites, and even Mormon groups, who live in communities that would be considered not living in the 21st century. Then there are the Haredim in Israel, orthodox Jews, who make up 9% of the population, and are pure assholes.Yet, we don't focouse on that stuff, because it would be petty, and would generate the wrong impression. Right now, the same hing is happening to Muslims, where we focouse on terrorism, and certain countries in the middle East, to paint the entire religion as backwards and violent.

although I doubt places like saudi arabia would be any more moderate without foreign interference in fact probably even more hard line

They became more strict after the creation of Israel, which now includes forbidding Jews from working or living there - but they have become less strict in other aspects in recent years.

But what creates hardline Judaism?

As I said, it's a perpetual cycle. What does bothers me the most is this view by many Jews of their divine right, or manifest destiny, to reclaim the nation of Israel, and following the traditions of the Torah to almost fanatical devotion, which they use to justify their presence in the Middle East. That is going to continue to clash with their Muslims cousins there.

Hardliners don't inhabit just a particular religion, silly, they can inhabit any one of them.
I never said they did
I mean where did I say that?
you can`t just put words into my mouth like that.

It's either my failure to understand you, or it's your failure to articulate your views that don't give that impression. You have continuously generalized, and focused on the failures of the Islamic religion, giving me the impression you believe it has more to do with the fundamentals of it, rather than the interpretation, while claiming the opposite for other religions. And I'm going by this "I think the nature of Islam is far more inviting to viscous ideologies".

So the solution to that is more muslim immigration and then to let them isolate themselves in groups so that they can cultivate there own hard-line ideologies?

I had a hard time following your Alabama/Pakistan analogy... So I explain it in my own way:

Many cultures, and races, isolate themselves from one another, intentionally or not, whether it be native Americans, white, black, hispanic, Christian, Jews, or Muslims.... They do this out of fear of the other - more about safety in numbers, a feeling of security(there are other reasons to). While the US may be a multi culture, it often panders to the majority of white, Christians, aspect of it, which often clashes with minority views, and leads to a noticeable amount of hardliners on almost all sides. Many in the majority will always treat minorities with suspicion, and become hard line if they think they will become a threat to them, while pointing out how they are being vilified by those minorities. So, of course you will get conflict when you get large amounts of a different culture to quickly.

Not to mention that far right groups in this country have tried to commit, or have committed, more terrorist acts than Muslims.
In proportion to the amount of right-wing groups and muslims?

They don't experience hate crime anywhere near the amount that Muslims do in this country.

and anyway what creates far-right terrorists ?

Culture, self righteousness, and insecurities.

But, again, you, and many others, are treating a religion as if it was a disease,
I am?

You brought it up, while also distancing yourself from it, while also pointing to Islam as the main problem. You need to make up your mind.

I think it`s a complicated and sensitive issue so it requires a nuanced and sensitive solution and I really don`t now enough about it to offer one but if people are going to act like you are ie. ignoring the other side of the debate and putting words into their mouths then that`s not going to happen.

It is a complicated issue, I agree. But you have floundered about, making generalization, and poorly wording things, while accusing the other side of "putting words into their mouths", and then doing the same yourself. I try to just clarify, instead of always pointing it out.

I`m not really attacking Islam but certain interpretations of Islam by certain muslims but however just because somthing is a religion it shouldn`t necessarily be above attack merely because it`s a religion.

You right, it shouldn't be off limit, but how you argue it is another matter.

GXFICH
GXFICH
  • Member since: Aug. 24, 2016
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 07
Blank Slate
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-14 07:41:25 (edited 2017-12-14 07:44:11) Reply

At 12/12/17 05:49 PM, EdyKel wrote:
Right now, the same hing is happening to Muslims, where we focouse on terrorism, and certain countries in the middle East, to paint the entire religion as backwards and violent.

Terrorism isn`t the only thing I was talking about there is within some (not all and not all to the same extent(feel free to ignore that bit and accuse me of making generalisations why don`t you?)) muslim communities (the same could be said about Hindus as well) a problem with sexism, homophobia, anti-semitism, domestic abuse, arranged marriages, inter-breeding and (very rarely) honour killings.
However whenever anyone talks about it they are accused of being racist and I do not think the liberal authorities and medias attitude to this is healthy at all.
Don`t get me wrong people should be allowed to do what they like within the law but I think enforcement of the law sometimes is forgotten in favour of religious tolerance.


although I doubt places like saudi arabia would be any more moderate without foreign interference in fact probably even more hard line
They became more strict after the creation of Israel, which now includes forbidding Jews from working or living there - but they have become less strict in other aspects in recent years.

They are wahabists that means they have a similar view of sharia to @AD3-N
A view rejected by most Muslims even those of a highly conservative persuasion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabism

I don`t think Israel is really the root of it


while claiming the opposite for other religions. And I'm going by this "I think the nature of Islam is far more inviting to viscous ideologies".

Saying Islam is more inviting to viscous ideologies does not imply the opposite for other religions indeed Some of the things done in the name of Christianity would make even al-queada think twice.
nor does it imply that all or even most muslims follow such ideologies.
It`s just my opinion and I may be proved wrong as I have fairly limited knowledge about it.

I`ll just go back to this because I don`t think I made myself clear


You still seem to be confusing Muslims with Islam. Muslims are religious; Islam is a religion. Two different things.
Son, I'm not much for word games.I have little patience with those who try to give me the run around by trying to be cute.

Hating Islam is not the same as hating Muslims.
don`t you see that saying otherwise is a logical fallacy?
whether or not hating Islam is justified is a different matter or more accurately whether only believing the far-right perspective and not trying to find a more balanced opinion is justified neither means hating muslims.


BBS Signature
RyzoJ89
RyzoJ89
  • Member since: Feb. 28, 2017
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 04
Animator
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-14 14:38:09 Reply

I Came Here because i thought it said "Lets Talk About SHANIA".

Had me all, "Man, I Feel Like A Woman..."

EdyKel
EdyKel
  • Member since: Dec. 11, 2009
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 26
Gamer
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-15 01:58:37 (edited 2017-12-15 02:00:20) Reply

At 12/14/17 07:41 AM, GXFICH wrote:
At 12/12/17 05:49 PM, EdyKel wrote:
Terrorism isn`t the only thing I was talking about there is within some (not all and not all to the same extent(feel free to ignore that bit and accuse me of making generalisations why don`t you?)) muslim communities (the same could be said about Hindus as well) a problem with sexism, homophobia, anti-semitism, domestic abuse, arranged marriages, inter-breeding and (very rarely) honour killings.

A lot of this stuff has been focused on for the last 20 years, with many far right groups leading the charge. They have a habit of over reporting on it, pushing fake shit, and taking things out of proportion, and then they accuse the other side of calling them racist when the reason behind their shit is questioned. I won't deny many on the left are eager to call the other side racists,and those pushing this shit, which any group would call racistif they felt it was directed at them. And indeed, when the left brings up stuff about Christians, or Jews, or whites, or males, to counter the right's shit, the right claims the left is being racist and bigots against those groups. Any attempt to put this shit into scale, and proper perspective, is argued over, by both sides, which each sides throwing out the racist word willy-nilly at each other.

So, you are not bringing up a new argument here, you are just bringing up the usual talking points, more than anything else, while bemoaning about how the other side doesn't want to recognize (or will outright dismiss) the arguments against Islam, and implying that people will accuse those who bring it up as racist.... All the while, never backing up your own argument with hard facts and numbers, over a very complicated, and imprecise, subject, which is why I am always pointing out your arguments are more of generalizations than anything else. .

Have you actually seen the statistics that make Muslims worse than other groups? I kinda doubt it. I sort have looked at it, but not very deeply, but I haven't seen anything that really pops out. In some Muslim dominated countries you could make your argument, but you can't about others. And then you look at other countries, with a Christian dominated religion, like Uganda, or Russia, and they can be worse over certain things, like over LGBT. And theUS, which is one of the richest countries in the world, has the highest gun violence in the world, outside of 3rd world nations, and wars zones, with majority of it being from Domestic violence.

So, if you really want to promote the idea that Islam favors violence, and hate, more than other religions, then you will have to find hard numbers to back it up with. You can start at at the pew research report and go from there.

However whenever anyone talks about it they are accused of being racist and I do not think the liberal authorities and medias attitude to this is healthy at all.

Whether you want to admit it or not, there are a lot of racist and bigots out there who really do hate other groups, and promote hate against them. And I agree that the word racist has been thrown around to often these days. I've been called a racist, and a bigot, several times, mostly from conservatives, or Israelis and Christians, because I either don't support a policy, a certain candidate, or an idea. In one case, I was called a racist by a racist who was arguing that blacks had smaller brains because of their brain cavity, and that they believed in religions with UFOs in them - some really weird shit. But, I just shrug that shit off. I know where I stand, so I'm not really worried by what others call me, or think of me.

Don`t get me wrong people should be allowed to do what they like within the law but I think enforcement of the law sometimes is forgotten in favour of religious tolerance.

Oh, and what would that be?

although I doubt places like saudi arabia would be any more moderate without foreign interference in fact probably even more hard line
They became more strict after the creation of Israel, which now includes forbidding Jews from working or living there - but they have become less strict in other aspects in recent years.
They are wahabists that means they have a similar view of sharia to @AD3-N
A view rejected by most Muslims even those of a highly conservative persuasion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabism

I don`t think Israel is really the root of it

When you have a rival, especially in politics, what do you do? Do you act nice, or do you tear them apart, and look for any dirt you can find to use against them. Religion is not much different. It all comes down to competition for power, and influence, in the region, and that shit usually distracts from other important issues. It's why I don't really like any party, and will begrudgingly side with one, if I think they are semi reasonable on their views. I really hate all this race shit that both sides do.

while claiming the opposite for other religions. And I'm going by this "I think the nature of Islam is far more inviting to viscous ideologies".
Saying Islam is more inviting to viscous ideologies does not imply the opposite for other religions indeed Some of the things done in the name of Christianity would make even al-queada think twice.
nor does it imply that all or even most muslims follow such ideologies.
It`s just my opinion and I may be proved wrong as I have fairly limited knowledge about it.

I`ll just go back to this because I don`t think I made myself clear
You still seem to be confusing Muslims with Islam. Muslims are religious; Islam is a religion. Two different things.
Son, I'm not much for word games.I have little patience with those who try to give me the run around by trying to be cute.
Hating Islam is not the same as hating Muslims.
don`t you see that saying otherwise is a logical fallacy?
whether or not hating Islam is justified is a different matter or more accurately whether only believing the far-right perspective and not trying to find a more balanced opinion is justified neither means hating muslims.

You made yourself clear, I just disagree with your position on it. It really isn't much more complicated than that. If your putting more blame on Islam, on the religion, then that logic can also apply to other religions as well, for all the problems they create - but you don't. You have also argued that personal interpretation of the this religion is what leads most Muslims to not be violent, while arguing that their religion leads to more violence. You also argue that hating Islam is not hating Muslim, even though you claim they are more violent; and in that process you are dismissing human nature, and giving Muslims extremists, in what appears to be, a free pass, and blaming their religion for their actions, while insulting non-violent Muslims over their religion, while holding the opposite view for other religions. Can you tell me at what point is your argument not one giant fallacy?

I mean, you haven't even done anything like @ADR3-N, who has pointed out selected verses from the Quran, to illustrate your own argument on why you think it leads to more hate and violence - of course I could do the same (and have done that to some extent with ADR-N). Again, My argument has always been about certain interpretations of the Quran that leads to extremism and hardliners, which can be facilitated by circumstantial reasons. It's also better to disapprove of the views of those interpretation, rather than hating an entire religion.

ADR3-N
ADR3-N
  • Member since: Sep. 3, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 24
Musician
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-15 10:15:47 Reply

At 12/9/17 03:00 PM, Camarohusky wrote: I have never really understood the fear and furor over Sharia. How someone wants to conduct their own life is up to them. Also, I find it odd that religion seeping into and in some cases overriding law is only an issue when Muslims do it.

I don't know, maybe because Sharia law entails people like me being killed, crucified, or our hands and feet cut off on opposite sides because we criticize Islam. Jussayin'. Really does happen. That's just one of the cruel and unusual punishments under Sharia, though.

If @Troisnyx ever was forced to go back to Malaysia, that could be her reality, since Malaysia recently passed a bill to enact Islamic caning and stoning for things as simple as alcohol consumption and apostasy. Previously they had been holding off because Sharia conflicted with their constitution. Common law and Sharia used to be separate. Now they are merging.

This can happen to any state at any time, IF Sharia is allowed a foothold.

At 12/10/17 01:05 PM, EdyKel wrote: You could say that it's very much ingrained for Christians to attack other religions, and those who diverge from their interpretation of the bible.

For the fiftieth time, nowhere in the Bible will you find scriptural support for violence in the name of Christ. You do find Matthew 5:44, "Love your enemies and pray for them that persecute you," and Jesus rebuking Peter for cutting off a man's ear in his defense, Matthew 26:52, because "Those who draw the sword die by the sword."

But we're here for Sharia, not to teach you what the Bible says. You want that, make a new topic.

Rather than babble about the crusades, which, though largely defensive, are not condoned by Christian scripture, it would be far more logically consistent of you to critique the 1400+ year Islamic genocide of non-Muslims that is still going on today, which IS supported by Quranic scripture, as I have proven time and time again. Without that, your counterpoints hold about as much weight as a wet paper bag.

Son, I'm not much for word games. I have little patience with those who try to give me the run around by trying to be cute. You are treating theses things as if they were the same, by generalizing, and stereotyping, the hell out of them.

I'm trying to get you to learn the difference between two nouns, Islam, and Muslims. Or rather, I was. Now I'm trying to figure out if you're dishonest, stubborn, or willfully stupid for the sake of rhetoric.

As for your argument about the religion, it all comes down to interpretation over the religious text. You only think in two dimensional ways, son.

That's because there are two ways to interpret texts -- the way they were intended, or otherwise. Your interpretation of both Islam and Christianity is the latter, and although I would love, love, love to be wrong about Islam as perhaps the most retrograde force man has ever known, and I would be willing to concede on Christianity just for the sake of argument if I thought you might ever let your own prejudices go, the fact is, you're insisting groups like IS and Hamas are interpreting the Islamic sources incorrectly -- and it's clear to anyone who has ever bothered to investigate that they're not.

All you're doing at this point is trying to derail the topic on the same issues you've already been refuted on, I don't know, 30 times?

It doesn't take much to see this shit, that you are nowhere capable of have a non-objective view

You seem to think that your secular worldview excludes you from having non-objective views. False.

I already did, you made a lot of excuses for them, or you never responded back.

Anyways, I'll just post this.

Because the same tired criticisms have already been answered. I'm starting to think you just don't know how to read. The same exact points brought up in that article were addressed in my last post, and I just can't take Jenkins, the author of The Jesus Wars seriously. He really does think the largescale Islamic jihad against Jews, Christians, Hindus, pagans, and various others was defensive. Study the historical origins of Islam, even in the classical narrative in the Quran and the Hadith, and you quickly discover this to be patently false.

You basically defended the verse about slavery in the bible

Because Biblical slavery is not chattel slavery. It's willful indentured servitude, equipped with a nice package of human rights and dignity, not to mention political asylum for foreigners, totally alien to the Levant, prior.

while deflecting from the fact that protestant Christians owned slaves in this country

No. You're just salty the Bible doesn't support the chattel slavery that went on in the US...

while going after it when it's done by Muslims.

... which I've already shown originated in the Middle East, perpetrated by Islam, causing the deaths of over 90% of 19 million plus African slaves. This is why we see the progeny of slaves in America -- like Michelle Obama -- and hardly any in Muslim nations. That's right. The men were castrated and the women were kept as sex slaves. It is under Islamic law that this still happens today.

You also seem quite about Christians who support Trump, while accusing Obama of being anti-christian because he admonishes Christians for their views on gays, and forcing them to pay for women birth control that over 90% of Christian women use.

As much as I'm a passionate pro-lifer, that's respectably not my life passion. If you want to talk more, take me to task in a separate topic. At this point, you're just bringing up extraneous points and character smears to get away from the subject.

Basically, you come off as some religious zealot, man, who makes up a lot shit up, hoping some of it will stick. It's like you are trying to smother your opponent with large quantities of shit to win your argument, when you have no quality in it.

Are you done trying to derail the topic yet?

I'm fucking agnostic about this shit, and I don't really care about religion, as long as it doesn't afect me.

That explains why you're so quick to discount non-western religious motivations for atrocities. Huh. Well, I wasn't going to say so myself, but that settles it.

The rest of your stuff I vaguely looked at but it really didn't capture my attention, and I really don't know what you were going on about.... I guess it's more cherry picking and one sided nonsense.

Replace cherry picking with opinions and you have my feelings on what you've brought to the discussion so far.

I'm looking for quality, not quantity or BS, in discussions.

Likewise. So please, if you have anything to contribute to the conversation, step up your game.

At 12/10/17 04:15 PM, Ghoti wrote: Religion is one thing, and religious extremism is another. Can't blame all Catholics for beheading Charles I. Can't blame all Protestants for Salem Witch Trials.

Where did I blame a single Muslim for what Islam has done? On the contrary, I blame Islam for what it has motivated Muslims to do. Big difference.

I've got about 1000 characters left, but that's nowhere near enough to properly address anyone else's posts, so I'm going to split this reply here.

Thanks for the engagement, everyone. I figured most people in /pol/ would just shrug and move on. The media avoids it like cancer, and so does most of mainstream academia. They'd rather talk about the crusades, or eeeevillll zionismmmm. It's been fun so far.

GXFICH
GXFICH
  • Member since: Aug. 24, 2016
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 07
Blank Slate
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-15 10:22:43 (edited 2017-12-15 10:37:30) Reply

At 12/15/17 01:58 AM, EdyKel wrote:
You made yourself clear, I just disagree with your position on it. It really isn't much more complicated than that. If your putting more blame on Islam,

You said yourself that these subjects should not be off limits and you have failed to say why you disagree .


on the religion, then that logic can also apply to other religions as well, for all the problems they create - but you don't.

The problems caused by Islam come from questionable readings of sharia which is as i said open to interpretation whereas the most other religions only really have one interpretation which is ignored by most its followers so they generally just do whatever.


You have also argued that personal interpretation of the this religion is what leads most Muslims to not be violent,

As there is no single way to follow sharia it is also personal interpretation that leads muslims to be violent, if they lived how Mohammed intended then unprovoked violence wouldn`t really be a thing so really it is the other way round.


while arguing that their religion leads to more violence.

and your argument is i am not allowed to argue that.


You also argue that hating Islam is not hating Muslim,

do you agree with that?


even though you claim they are more violent;

Not all of them no.


and in that process you are dismissing human nature, and giving Muslims extremists, in what appears to be, a free pass, and blaming their religion for their actions,

Most of them think they are acting for the best and are fighting for religious reasons but blaming their religion for their actions would be a very simplistic view which is why I didn`t say it and made a slightly more subtle argument that you clearly missed.
I don`t think the concept of blame is very helpful here either


while insulting non-violent Muslims over their religion,

fuck off
there that was the only insult I made in this thread


while holding the opposite view for other religions.

nope


Can you tell me at what point is your argument not one giant fallacy?

all the bits that were not in-between the lines


I mean, you haven't even done anything like @ADR3-N, who has pointed out selected verses from the Quran, to illustrate your own argument on why you think it leads to more hate and violence

As the question is Islam more open to violent interpretation is really only academic.
I cannot be bothered to go through the quran and the sunnah (preferably in arabic) to find quotes to support my case but If you insist sources like this (which was included in my original post) which contains quotes like"Inevitably aspects of Islam examined separately, without a wide-ranging grasp of its totality, will be taken in a fragmented context, in which case aspects may take on the appearance of extremism." and "the logic of the Shariah, with its minimal number of clear interdictions, and maximal scope for the interpretative extension of key precepts to particular situations," does in my view Indicate that the sharia is more open to violent interpretation than most if the reader should be that way inclined and thanks to human nature some of them inevitably will be.

I don`t want this to become a last post wins type argument and I kind of feel like we`ve hijacked @ADR3-N `s topic so just to let you know I may not respond any more.


BBS Signature
ADR3-N
ADR3-N
  • Member since: Sep. 3, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 24
Musician
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-15 12:12:37 Reply

At 12/11/17 04:06 PM, GXFICH wrote: Sharia is highly open to interpretation
you may find this article interesting (you may think it`s too partisan but then so were the links you provided).

Yeah, it's a little too partisan. You got me there. I still appreciate the gesture. The problem is, the same guy this article insists was sent as a mercy for all mankind also raped, pillaged, and killed a bunch of people, and his example is the basis for Sharia, as I have shown previously.

Even if only one Islamic punishment for apostasy -- beheading -- was ever enacted, Sharia as a whole is still not something we should consider, since the Sunnah of Muhammad in full is a package deal, at least all of it that is Sahih (reliably narrated). We'd also have to kill black dogs, too, and I like black dogs.

It is really not as simple as saying sharia says this or sharia says that based on a few cherry picked quotations (like you did).
And at the end of the day Muslims are going to follow sharia law no matter what because that is what they believe in, so unless you want to exile, kill or forcibly repress every Muslim in america (which I sincerely hope you don`t ) you`re going to have to deal with it.

I think you're mistaking my condemnation of Sharia as a legal system others are forced to follow rather than one individuals choose to follow. That's not what I'm on about at all. I don't impose the ten commandments on other people. Nor do I want to. I simply don't want the demonstrably more cruel, more complex Islamic law forced upon me, like what is happening in Malaysia that I linked in my previous post.

That said it is not just the "tiny radical minority" that hold views unacceptable to western morality although there are a large number of liberal Muslims they are when compared to the total number of Muslims in the world are a minority themselves and not a particularly large minority either...

Yes, and yes. And those liberal Muslims would also be persecuted, as we would be, if Sharia were allowed to get into our legal system.

l think this is a suitably suitable video on the subject.

Oh you love PragerU too? Sweet. Video is pretty accurate. I'll have to add it to my favorites.

I do wish the guy spoke a little faster though. I had to speed it up. However, with due respect for what he's trying to do, I don't believe Islam can be reformed, or should. Rather, it should be refuted, since its origins are textually and historically illegitimate; I don't think it's fair or humane to deprive Muslims of what we now know, regarding that. The best course of action is to increase knowledge of the subject.

Also I agree shit like this is a problem

Yes. It's one of the reasons, among many, I believe we should not even allow Sharia tribunals for civil cases.

responses to EdyKel

Didn't expect anyone to jump over on my behalf. Usually everyone just duels it out one on one and ignores the rest of the posts because they're too longwinded and boring. Pleasant surprise I'm not the only one who thought most of that reply was selective-hearing and dodging.

You have no patience for those who say they don`t hate muslims because there trying to be cute?
I wouldn`t have got involved but that really gets me.

Don't worry. He spends most of his time with character smears, generalizations, and insults when he otherwise can't handle a point. It does get old sometimes.

and by your logic :

You still seem to be confusing leprosy with lepers. lepers are afflicted; leprosy is a disease. Two different things.
Son, I'm not much for word games

Quoted, since it was way funnier than my own refutation.

Also attitudes can change so much in a few generations, unless differences between muslims and non-muslims can be permanently settled that in 100 or so years there`s nothing to say that we won`t be having a myanmar style exedous of our own.

Or extinction. That's what would happen to Israel if Islam had its way. The Jews and the Christians would become dhimmis or die, and the rest wouldn't get the option -- unless they were sold into slavery, and then they'd only be kept around so long as they were useful, like the Yazidis.

I find it funny no one cries when Jews and Christians are executed per Sharia, but as soon as someone touches the Yazidis, the media pity parties like it's 1999. No doubt, the plight of the Yazidis is horrid, but so is that of the Nasareen and the Jew. All are oppressed under Sharia. All suffer at the hands of Islam. And it's even worse for Islam's apostates.

At 12/11/17 07:05 PM, EdyKel wrote: Then we had the creation of Israel

Wouldn't be so bad if Islam didn't teach Jews are the scum of the earth. Hitler is Islam's favorite infidel. ;)

You realize Muhammad had over 800 surrendered Jewish men and boys and at least one woman from the Banu Qurayza beheaded, then took their women and girls as sex slaves, right? Ibn Kathir, Volume 3, Page 170. They dug a big trench. It ran red with blood.

"Extremists" still do it today, and they back it up with references to Quran and Hadith. Dabiq magazine is a good example.

countless innocent civilians being killed by indiscriminate bombings, vast lost of infrastructure and homes, control by foreign powers....

And who do these foreign powers so frequently install? Islamic dictators straight from organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood.

All this led to the rise of Muslim extremists

Hello, 1st and 2nd book of Opinions.

It's part of a much larger argument between us that goes well beyond this topic.

I love you too, but now we all know why you're really here.

You can''t be a leper without Leprosy, and leprosy leads to lepers.

Yes, but a leper is not leprosy. Leprosy is not a leper. He isn't A disease. He HAS a disease. God grant me patience here, too. It's a pain in the rear to be the one doing the conversational footwork when you leave all that extra junk in!

And indeed, your example is quite appropriate, considering that many people consider Islam a disease, and those affected by it, as diseased.

He literally said there is no analogy between Islam and leprosy. You must be a bitter old codger or a true politician; you take every opportunity to twist our words into daggers. Tbh, in one ear, out the other. Usually full of hate. Always an angle.

Don't play these games with me, son.

How many sons do you have, now? At least one of us must be trans. I'm a girl.

Sure, but if you start arguing from that standpoint, without having anything to back it up with, other than wanting to say it to indicate you have a superior view, without realizing that, then you are no different that the argument you are making against another person. I believe this is a logic fallacy.

That's called genetic and tu quoque fallacy.

Anyways, I had to cut out most of his

*her

original post from that in that reply because most of it were selected examples, and verses from the Quran, which painted his whole argument as one sided, and non-objective.

"I'd rather argue from my own opinions than what Islam actually teaches, then deflect and character assassinate those I don't agree with."

And it not limited to this topic, but several. he always attacking Muslims, and Islam, while playing word games.

Look, dad, I can't help you know nothing about Islam past Barack Obama quotes, you constantly misgender me, and you haven't bothered to investigate not just Islam but your opponents' arguments. I can try to pretend otherwise while you generalize, double down on your rhetoric, and deflect because you think Christians are hateful and stupid, but it gets old.

To many insecure Christian these days, who have that whole persecution complex going on, with little to show for.

Thing is, Christians are actually being persecuted, and you're jumping on the Islamic apologist bandwagon, swallowing MSM swill, and not bothering to check facts. And you deflect constantly.

ADR3-N
ADR3-N
  • Member since: Sep. 3, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 24
Musician
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-15 13:21:02 Reply

At 12/12/17 05:49 PM, EdyKel wrote: And again, you haven't offered anything that really changes what creates extremism, or hardliners, other than indicating it's Islam, and it has nothing to do with the actions of foreign powers or Israel.

That could have something to do with the fact that Islam itself rewards criticism and apostasy with death, and uses its xenophobic scriptures to fuel terrorism and genocide.

And you keep indicating it's Islam, not any other religions, or foreign interference, at fault.

Probably because all that other crap is tertiary and tangential to the issue.

Let's not forget that the Dome of the Rock, built in 691 as a polemic against Christians by Abd Al-Malik, who is now thought by historical critics as the ruler who initially fabricated the Quran, Muhammad's prophethood, and the shifty redactive history of Muhammad's life and times as a political and cultural weapon against Judeo-Christian society.

Of course, further investigation into this shatters the classical narrative of Islam and shows the whole shebang to be an egregiously malicious deception. Whether Islamic orthopraxy is based in truth is only relevant to dispel its myths of beneficence, however, not the politics behind Temple Mount's sacred status. That was another later redaction.

Qur'an 17:1 says that Muhammad's "night journey" was from the furthest mosque, ostensibly in Mecca (which is not even mentioned on a map until ~200 years after his death) to (or from) Al-Aqsa, or the Dome of the Rock. The problem is, all the buildings were not built until long after his death, and Mecca doesn't even fit the geographical specifities mentioned in the Quran; Petra seems to have been replaced by Mecca, once the black stone was taken there some time after an earthquake crippled Petra.

There's a problem with the night journey narrative though, too. The Arabic inscriptions inside all deny the deity of Christ; nothing about a night journey from the furthest mosque to Temple Mount and then to heaven to finalize the 5 prayers, which is the Islamic narrative. No. It's built on Temple Mount, the holiest site to Jews, and was built in the same style as the Holy Sepulchre as one big, blasphemous middle finger to the Jewish and Christian dhimmis, who must pay jizyah and "feel themselves subdued," as I have demonstrated earlier, or die.

So, that last terrorist attack on Temple Mount -- yeah, just more people dying for another Islamic lie, terror fueled by Islamic ideology. If politics were not tertiary to the issue, no one would be shouting "Allahu Akbar" as they killed Jews, or instead of denouncing the killers, protest about the metal detectors and cameras installed to prevent people from killing more Jews. No one would be rejoicing every time a Jew died at the hands of jihadis.

Besides, if I want to see examples of local hardliners I will just watch the Alabama election, with Roy Moore talking about where the woman's place is, his gay, race, and non-christian religion, hating, and who believe that 9-11 was god's judgment against a sinful country.

Aaand yet another attempt at equivocation, derailing the topic.

According to a public poll, about 1 in 9 people in the US sympathize with white nationalist and Neo-Nazis, as they exhibit religious hatred of some form towards non-christian groups. And the rise of hate crimes has risen to it's highest point since 9-11, against minority groups. Not to mention that far right groups in this country have tried to commit, or have committed, more terrorist acts than Muslims.

More derailing and tu quoque. That last video he linked up there pointed out the majority of even moderate Muslims approve of Sharia's worst evils. The best you have is, "Oh, some whack jobs in the US do x hateful thing, even though we know Christian doctrine denounces racism, hate, and genocide." You are willfully ignorant.

I don't get the feeling you are taking any of this very serious.

We feel the same way about you.

just don't have a solution other than accusing it what you want it to be: "A punching bag for all the blame"

Look in the mirror. This is exactly what you're doing to non-Muslims who don't agree with you. :)

I'm not really taking a side in all this.

Could've fooled me. I don't see you speaking out against any of the atrocities brought up in thread. I do see you deflecting, making excuses, and kowtowing at every turn to justify the barbarism you claim to hate.

I'm just pointing out an observation that their are circumstantial reasons that have lead to more Muslim hardliners and extremism, from just the usual shit that can tern anyone into a hardliner and extremist. I'm not condoning the atrocities, or hatred, from Muslims, just pointing out that all the reasons shouldn't be shouldered by them alone.

Case in point. No one says, "Hitler shouldn't have to shoulder the reasons for his atrocities or hatred on his own." No. He absolutely does. So does Islam. Apparently, you think Muslims are helpless idiots, incapable of being responsible for their own actions. Out of here with that nonsense.

This is just one huge logical fallacy that keep slapping you in the face.

I think the shoe is on the other foot.

If you were a Muslim, verbally attacking another religion, I would do the same, and point out all the wrong shit that muslims have done to other religions.

So you won't concede that Islam's teachings are a force for evil until you disagree with a Muslim? That sounds awfully convenient. That's called hypocrisy. And you STILL can't seem to differentiate between Islam and individual Muslims. Not only is that prejudiced, but it's completely moronic.

And I'm not playing devils' advocate, either, It's simply that I rather have religions get along than fight each other.

Really. How convenient that not only do you not do your research when you see fit to play arbiter between religions you neither comprehend nor care about, you also like to tell them to play nice. That hasn't been very productive for the MSM, and it won't be for you either.

I'm not turning a bind eye.

I dunno about that, but you've been alternating between inserting foot in mouth and shooting it for a while now.

It's just not focused just on Muslims, and always making them out to be the scapegoat. There are plenty of things you can blame the Muslims for

Islam. You're starting to sound like one of those Nazi's you've been ranting about, except replace Jew with Muslim.

but it would also be stupid to deny how foreign powers, and Israel, have affected the Middle East, and their culture. Personally, I rather they stop being the lightening rods, and perhaps the Muslim world will go through their own enlightenment, and progressive movements, like they were once heading towards, until they got distracted, bombed the shit out of, vilified by the West....

Replace Israel with Islam, and the rest of the paragraph with the exact opposite of what you're generally trying to say, and that's about accurate. You're still ignoring the fact Islam hated Israel before Israel ever did anything wrong.

Seriously, EdyKel, this is getting old.

ADR3-N
ADR3-N
  • Member since: Sep. 3, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 24
Musician
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-15 14:16:21 Reply

This will be the last of my responses to the arguments brought up prior to my earlier post. And sorry for the very large, possibly inconvenient read. I felt there was a lot that needed addressing. And the topic needs steered back to port. Hence I'll try not to address anything not related to Sharia in this post.

At 12/15/17 10:22 AM, GXFICH wrote: The problems caused by Islam come from questionable readings of sharia which is as i said open to interpretation whereas the most other religions only really have one interpretation which is ignored by most its followers so they generally just do whatever.

Actually, the readings aren't really questionable at all. It's all right there, clear in the Arabic and even the English.

If you want the most up to date exegesis, Sayyid Qutb's work is widely appreciated across the Islamic world, but Dabiq magazine is doing an excellent job of showing rather than telling.

Wahhabism and Sunni Islam are well established, and very violent, schools of interpretation. You will be hard-pressed to find any respected Islamic scholar that doesn't assent to everything I presented in my very first post, since everything I have presented is based on the life and times of Muhammad and the ostensible word of Allah in the Quran.

A disbeliever is easily identified by his reluctance to submit to Muhammad in all of his decisions, and Muhammad was not the kind of man you wanted to meet in an alley. No Muslim wants to disobey Muhammad. They'll be killed. Sura 9:5. Sura 9:29. Sura 8:39 - And fight them until there is no more fitnah (disbelief) and until the religion, all of it, is for Allah.

This is what Sharia is, making Muhammad judge between you and submitting to his decisions. That's not something I want. But you will note many Muslims are afraid to criticize Islam based on the above.

As there is no single way to follow sharia it is also personal interpretation that leads muslims to be violent, if they lived how Mohammed intended then unprovoked violence wouldn`t really be a thing so really it is the other way round.

I addressed this in an earlier response. If you read, you'll catch it. But I know as someone who hears the MSM narrative, this can be a hard maxim to let go of until you dig deeper.

Most of them think they are acting for the best and are fighting for religious reasons but blaming their religion for their actions would be a very simplistic view which is why I didn`t say it and made a slightly more subtle argument that you clearly missed.

Gee, GXFICH, you'd almost think someone was intentionally misrepresenting your views for the sake of argument. That's called strawmanning. :)

As the question is Islam more open to violent interpretation is really only academic.

I don't see why you're being grilled. Even though the references on Quran.com and Sunnah.com are freely available, I don't expect everyone to pop out and debate me scripture for scripture.

Most Americans are not interested in Islamic studies; we just want hard, fast facts. That's why I tried to provide most of it head on, hoping someone would fact check and discuss, not hijack the thread with anti-Christian, anti-Jew rhetoric.

I cannot be bothered to go through the quran and the sunnah (preferably in arabic) to find quotes to support my case but If you insist sources

Don't bother. If he was really hurting for sources and not just deflecting, he would have addressed at least one of the points in my initial post rather than going balls to the wall moaning about completely unrelated subjects.

I also want to again point out that Sharia is definitely more accurately understood in Arabic, but the fallacy that translations of Arabic suddenly become unintelligible when it comes to the Quran and Sunnah/Hadith is just that, fallacy. Since when did a fine howdy do lose it's meaning just because I said que pasa instead of what's up?

If anything the atrocities of the Islamic sources become even more damning in Arabic because you absolutely know virtually all the killing commands, racism, and oath breaking is open-ended.

does in my view Indicate that the sharia is more open to violent interpretation than most if the reader should be that way inclined and thanks to human nature some of them inevitably will be.

I'd argue it's more exacerbated by the latter, but yes, certainly wide open for murderous mischief.

I don`t want this to become a last post wins type argument and I kind of feel like we`ve hijacked @ADR3-N `s topic so just to let you know I may not respond any more.

You have, but it's clearly not been your intention all along. Can't say the same for @EdyKel, who jumped in right off the bat with deflections and character assassinations.

At 12/14/17 07:41 AM, GXFICH wrote: However whenever anyone talks about it they are accused of being racist and I do not think the liberal authorities and medias attitude to this is healthy at all.
Don`t get me wrong people should be allowed to do what they like within the law but I think enforcement of the law sometimes is forgotten in favour of religious tolerance.

Like Dearborn, MI enforcing Sharia at Arab Fest, and the police department allegedly covering up honor killings. Seeing as Christians were actually arrested just for asking questions or having pamphlets snatched from their persons, I'm liable to trust the Christians when they report what they were told.

They are wahabists that means they have a similar view of sharia to @AD3-N
A view rejected by most Muslims even those of a highly conservative persuasion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabism

Yes. Wahhabism is not as widespread, however, the video you linked us earlier addressed an important point. Though it may not be personally endorsed by many Muslims, Muslim communities overwhelmingly seem to condone it. Wahhabi Islam, no surprise, is virtually indistinguishable from the "extremism" we see borne form any sect of Islam.

I don`t think Israel is really the root of it

If it were, I don't think the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood would establish Muslim Student Associations across the USA. It seems counterproductive to recruit terrorists in America, then ship them off to other countries if just one single country is the root, not the ideology.

Saying Islam is more inviting to viscous ideologies does not imply the opposite for other religions indeed Some of the things done in the name of Christianity would make even al-queada think twice.

Absolutely. But the distinction is, Christians can't support genocide from current commands in their scripture. Muslims can.

nor does it imply that all or even most muslims follow such ideologies.
It`s just my opinion and I may be proved wrong as I have fairly limited knowledge about it.

Fair assessment. I'd really recommend some crash courses though, if you're patient enough to argue about it this long.

Hating Islam is not the same as hating Muslims.
don`t you see that saying otherwise is a logical fallacy?
whether or not hating Islam is justified is a different matter or more accurately whether only believing the far-right perspective and not trying to find a more balanced opinion is justified neither means hating muslims.

Yes. But I'm sure that'll all be glossed over or excused in some other self-aggrandizing deflection.

S3C
S3C
  • Member since: Mar. 25, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Supporter
Level 03
Musician
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-15 17:08:55 Reply

At 12/15/17 12:12 PM, ADR3-N wrote: Sharia as a whole is still not something we should consider, since the Sunnah of Muhammad in full is a package deal, at least all of it that is Sahih (reliably narrated).

100% agreed. Any religious text should not be considered as law.

We'd also have to kill black dogs, too, and I like black dogs.

don't bring race in to this, son. Well, I'm not sure if this was intended to be a humorous interjection, but I hope you don't take the bible as a full package deal either, otherwise we wouldn't be ableto welcome individuals who elected to get sex changes to church. And I like MtFs.

I think you're mistaking my condemnation of Sharia as a legal system others are forced to follow rather than one individuals choose to follow. That's not what I'm on about at all. I don't impose the ten commandments on other people. Nor do I want to. I simply don't want the demonstrably more cruel, more complex Islamic law forced upon me, like what is happening in Malaysia that I linked in my previous post.

well that's really all you needed to make clear in the opener, and then there would be so much less to debate.

I find it funny no one cries when Jews and Christians are executed per Sharia, but as soon as someone touches the Yazidis, the media pity parties like it's 1999.

Son, that's only true if you're using CNN and the like to bathe in your self-righteous anti-liberal agenda. There's plenty of media that disregards Judeo-Christians, Muslims, Blacks, Whites, etc. to fit their narrative. Don't be intellectually dishonest here by playing down to the lowest common denominator by tunnel-visioning your data from biased news sources.

ADR3-N
ADR3-N
  • Member since: Sep. 3, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 24
Musician
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-15 18:02:19 Reply

At 12/15/17 05:08 PM, S3C wrote:
We'd also have to kill black dogs, too, and I like black dogs.
don't bring race in to this, son.

I already linked a lecture somewhere up there with the relevant digs to Islamic colorism and slavery. You're a little late.

Well, I'm not sure if this was intended to be a humorous interjection

It was. Albeit one I figured deserved a reference for specificity and strangely prolific narration. Muhammad apparently really hated black things.

but I hope you don't take the bible as a full package deal either

I do, but I also believe in separation of church and state. Every time the church and state got married, it resulted in child abuse and undue stress on the kids. Always does. State corrupts the church, and church abuses state power to impinge on individual liberty. Not to mention, the state has the authority to go to war and levy taxes. The church does not and should not ever do either; tithes are to be good will offerings to support charity.

In Islam, church and state are package deal. The caliphate wages holy war and forces believers and non-believers alike to tithe in order to support the state.

otherwise we wouldn't be ableto welcome individuals who elected to get sex changes to church. And I like MtFs.

I don't see your logic. Jesus ate with tax collectors and prostitutes, whom your average person scorns, just like trans persons, and if believing in the Bible meant keeping sinners out of church, no one should ever have allowed me, of all people, in the front door -- especially since I was gay, trans, and borderline atheist.

Want to be consistent? Quit deflecting. Under the exact same circumstances in Sharia, not only would I be tossed out of mosques -- I'd be tossed off rooftops as a homosexual, raped as a non-hijab wearing female, and beheaded for my unbelief.

well that's really all you needed to make clear in the opener, and then there would be so much less to debate.

I've stated it multiple times. Leave it to /pol/ to assume everyone who isn't towing your party line to have some wacky anti-American agenda.

Son, that's only true if you're using CNN and the like to bathe in your self-righteous anti-liberal agenda.

You assume I get most of my news from the boob tube. Sorry to burst your assumptive bubble, but most of the MSM is owned by the same group of cronies, and they hash and rehash the same crap. You can get more from thirty minutes skimming the headlines online or even trolling blogs and amateur press than wasting time listening to Anderson Cooper or some proxy pretending to report in the best interest of Americans.

There's plenty of media that disregards Judeo-Christians, Muslims, Blacks, Whites, etc. to fit their narrative.

My question is, why are you acknowledging this if that is exactly what I'm saying. The persecution of Christians far and away almost never makes mainstream news, is almost always downplayed, and even swept under the rug, as if simply being the #1 religion in the world means that Christians are not a discounted, vilified, gas lit majority in many free nations and a persecuted minority virtually everywhere else, especially Islamic states. My point about the Yazidis stands.

Don't be intellectually dishonest here by playing down to the lowest common denominator by tunnel-visioning your data from biased news sources.

Aaaand ad hominem.

S3C
S3C
  • Member since: Mar. 25, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Supporter
Level 03
Musician
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-15 18:19:27 Reply

At 12/15/17 06:02 PM, ADR3-N wrote: I don't see your logic. Jesus ate with tax collectors and prostitutes, whom your average person scorns, just like trans persons, and if believing in the Bible meant keeping sinners out of church, no one should ever have allowed me, of all people, in the front door -- especially since I was gay, trans, and borderline atheist.

no logic needed here, just reading comprehension: the verse that I was posted was pretty clear. if you're a man that has damaged or missing testicles, you are not allowed to enter the church.

Want to be consistent? Quit deflecting. Under the exact same circumstances in Sharia, not only would I be tossed out of mosques -- I'd be tossed off rooftops as a homosexual, raped as a non-hijab wearing female, and beheaded for my unbelief.

I'm being very consistent, nor deflecting anything. You posted an absurd verse from the Quran that not all identifying Muslims follow, and I posted an absurd verse from the bible that surely not all Christians follow. I'm also not trying to compare the "evils" of two religions- which if we are to quantitatively compare the two, we both know who the winner is.


well that's really all you needed to make clear in the opener, and then there would be so much less to debate.
I've stated it multiple times. Leave it to /pol/ to assume everyone who isn't towing your party line to have some wacky anti-American agenda.
My question is, why are you acknowledging this if that is exactly what I'm saying.

that is not exactly what you were saying. You were only focusing on fake-leftist media.

The persecution of Christians far and away almost never makes mainstream news, is almost always downplayed, and even swept under the rug,

Watch Fox News sometime.

Aaaand ad hominem.

I don't see how I made an ad hominem attack.

EdyKel
EdyKel
  • Member since: Dec. 11, 2009
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 26
Gamer
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-15 21:32:49 Reply

At 12/15/17 10:22 AM, GXFICH wrote:
At 12/15/17 01:58 AM, EdyKel wrote:
You made yourself clear, I just disagree with your position on it. It really isn't much more complicated than that. If your putting more blame on Islam,
You said yourself that these subjects should not be off limits and you have failed to say why you disagree .

Ho hum.

I don't even know how you got this from what I said. I was responding to your argument about your position on hating on Islam, and not Muslims, and somehow you interpreted that I was saying it was off limits? Or is this how you just naturally argue, where you whine about people putting words in your mouth while doing the same shit to others?

I have admonished you for your generalizing the shit out of things, which heavily rely on your perspective, while also being incredibly vague. I have told you repeatedly to back your shit with hard facts, and statistics, or otherwise they are no more than biased talking points, which is really no basis of a conversation other than throwing shit at each other.

on the religion, then that logic can also apply to other religions as well, for all the problems they create - but you don't.
The problems caused by Islam come from questionable readings of sharia which is as i said open to interpretation whereas the most other religions only really have one interpretation which is ignored by most its followers so they generally just do whatever.

Again, you just have these generalizations, and nothing to back them up with. Can you at least cite source from the religion? Meanwhile, I can say that about the bible, where some of the shit it talks about is just downright evil. Hell, people were using the bible to justify slavery in this country, because it didn't call it a sin, but blessed it (more than a couple of time, even ones about selling your daughter into slavery). And then there are a lot of things about rape being okay, if you follow the rules. Then there is a whole lot about pillaging your enemy - which I guess is modern day warfare of taking resources from a country like we did in Iraq. Then there is justified murder, like killing witches, homosexuals, those who don't follow the words of the priest, those who commit adultery, those of other religions... And these are quite literally. There is no other interpretations of them:

“If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.” (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

"They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)"

"If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)"

"As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.(Deuteronomy 20:10-14)"

"Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)"

More if you want them.

You have also argued that personal interpretation of the this religion is what leads most Muslims to not be violent,
As there is no single way to follow sharia it is also personal interpretation that leads muslims to be violent, if they lived how Mohammed intended then unprovoked violence wouldn`t really be a thing so really it is the other way round.

And Christians are any less different? You already said in a previous post "indeed Some of the things done in the name of Christianity would make even al-queada think twice". You keep making exceptions to the rules, based on this fuzzy belief that Islam is not a religion of peace, while saying that things done in the name of Christianity have been worse than some of the thing Al Queada has done, even though it is also called a religion of peace and compassion.

And I have l already pointed out how the Middle East is constant war ground by foreign powers, which breeds stupidity and hate, from those living there. What the excuse for those chritian countries that invade their land? Some dictator, out of hundreds, who so happens to be in a region with the biggest source of oil?

You also argue that hating Islam is not hating Muslim,
do you agree with that?

I always believe hating some ideology, or religion, is better than hating people, but it is also a circular argument, because hating it just encompasses an entire group, and generalizes all those who follow it, them, instead of placing the entire blame on human nature of a small number of those who follow it but make up their own shit about it to justify their evil actions.

while arguing that their religion leads to more violence.
and your argument is i am not allowed to argue that.

You seem to be confusing the idea that opposing views to your argument are the same thing as not allowing you to promote your views.... unchallenged. If you haven't figured this out, I'm not stopping you from arguing anything, I'm just challenging it with my view.

Most of them think they are acting for the best and are fighting for religious reasons but blaming their religion for their actions would be a very simplistic view which is why I didn`t say it and made a slightly more subtle argument that you clearly missed.

Or they think of themselves as freedom fighters, and use religion to help justify their action. Learn about why people went over to fight for ISIS.

I mean, you haven't even done anything like @ADR3-N, who has pointed out selected verses from the Quran, to illustrate your own argument on why you think it leads to more hate and violence
As the question is Islam more open to violent interpretation is really only academic.
I cannot be bothered to go through the quran and the sunnah (preferably in arabic) to find quotes to support my case but If you insist sources like this (which was included in my original post) which contains quotes like"Inevitably aspects of Islam examined separately, without a wide-ranging grasp of its totality, will be taken in a fragmented context, in which case aspects may take on the appearance of extremism." and "the logic of the Shariah, with its minimal number of clear interdictions, and maximal scope for the interpretative extension of key precepts to particular situations," does in my view Indicate that the sharia is more open to violent interpretation than most if the reader should be that way inclined and thanks to human nature some of them inevitably will be.

If you can't do any legwork on your, and rely on biased talking points, then you have nothing more than generalized, an opinionated, arguments that are pretty devoid of value.

I don`t want this to become a last post wins type argument and I kind of feel like we`ve hijacked @ADR3-N `s topic so just to let you know I may not respond any more.

Oh, I was already thinking of stopping. I'm not really interested in going in circles. I kept hoping you would bring up some hard facts, other than just generalized, and biased, opinions. Unless you have some interesting point, or some solid baisis for a conversation, I don't see any reason to continue this pissing patch.

As for Sharia, I'm always against theological laws, no matter what religion they come from.

EdyKel
EdyKel
  • Member since: Dec. 11, 2009
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 26
Gamer
Response to Let's Talk Sharia 2017-12-15 21:33:30 Reply

At 12/15/17 10:15 AM, ADR3-N wrote:
At 12/10/17 01:05 PM, EdyKel wrote:
For the fiftieth time, nowhere in the Bible will you find scriptural support for violence in the name of Christ. You do find Matthew 5:44, "Love your enemies and pray for them that persecute you," and Jesus rebuking Peter for cutting off a man's ear in his defense, Matthew 26:52, because "Those who draw the sword die by the sword."

Luke 12:51
"Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division."

Luke 22:36
"He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one."

Hmm... It also doesn't change the fact that many wars, and violence, have been done in the name of Christianity.

As for the Quran:

“O You who believe! Enter absolutely into peace (Islam). Do not follow in the footsteps of satan. He is an outright enemy to you.” (Holy Quran: 2, 208)

“There is no compulsion where the religion is concerned.” (Holy Quran: 2/ 256)

“God does not forbid you from being good to those who have not fought you in the religion or driven you from your homes, or from being just towards them. God loves those who are just.” (Surat al-Mumtahana, 8)

“You cannot guide those you would like to but God guides those He wills. He has best knowledge of the guided.” (Holy Quran/28: 56)

“We have appointed a law and a practice for every one of you. Had God willed, He would have made you a single community, but He wanted to test you regarding what has come to you. So compete with each other in doing good. Every one of you will return to God and He will inform you regarding the things about which you differed.” (Surat al-Ma’ida, 48)

Rather than babble about the crusades, which, though largely defensive, are not condoned by Christian scripture, it would be far more logically consistent of you to critique the 1400+ year Islamic genocide of non-Muslims that is still going on today, which IS supported by Quranic scripture, as I have proven time and time again. Without that, your counterpoints hold about as much weight as a wet paper bag.

And yet a wet paper bag is heavier than an empty one.

The crusades were defensive? LOL I know you are a bit of a nut, but that's outright living in denial. So is claiming that genocide happened anymore under Islam than Christianity. Hell, even god bragged about genocide in the old testament., and had no qualms about it.

That's because there are two ways to interpret texts -- the way they were intended, or otherwise. Your interpretation of both Islam and Christianity is the latter, and although I would love, love, love to be wrong about Islam as perhaps the most retrograde force man has ever known, and I would be willing to concede on Christianity just for the sake of argument if I thought you might ever let your own prejudices go, the fact is, you're insisting groups like IS and Hamas are interpreting the Islamic sources incorrectly -- and it's clear to anyone who has ever bothered to investigate that they're not.

All you are telling me is that you have a large ego, while damning other Christian sects out there that don't share your interpretation of the bible, while also being an apologist for things that were done in the christian name, or by fellow Christians - and are still being done by them.

Because the same tired criticisms have already been answered. I'm starting to think you just don't know how to read. The same exact points brought up in that article were addressed in my last post, and I just can't take Jenkins, the author of The Jesus Wars seriously. He really does think the largescale Islamic jihad against Jews, Christians, Hindus, pagans, and various others was defensive. Study the historical origins of Islam, even in the classical narrative in the Quran and the Hadith, and you quickly discover this to be patently false.

Just disagree. And you already admitted you have an anal view on interpretations,: "yours, and it wrong" - two dimensional. All you have done is create a patently false narrative with selective facts, and interpretations, to carry your argument in the direction that best suites your views. That''s not objectivity.

Because Biblical slavery is not chattel slavery. It's willful indentured servitude, equipped with a nice package of human rights and dignity, not to mention political asylum for foreigners, totally alien to the Levant, prior.

Still defending, still making excuses. Slavery is wrong, mkay, no matter what form it takes. Or perhaps you think having no rights are good thing, which I am think you probably do - for other people.

... which I've already shown originated in the Middle East, perpetrated by Islam, causing the deaths of over 90% of 19 million plus African slaves. This is why we see the progeny of slaves in America -- like Michelle Obama -- and hardly any in Muslim nations. That's right. The men were castrated and the women were kept as sex slaves. It is under Islamic law that this still happens today.

The Arabs got into it 250 years before Islam was even a religion, and every major religion participated in it, from brokering to selling them - not the capturing of slaves. In Europe, especially in Mediterranean countries, slavery flourished, till about 1000AD. The only limitation was that Christian could not to be slaves, or sold to non-christian countries - of course, serfdom became popular up to the 19th century, which is slavery by a different name. The reason the justified it was because: Slaves were often outsiders taken in war. As such, Hebrew and Islamic thinking both conceived of the slave as an "enemy within". In the Christian tradition, pagans and heretics were similarly considered enemies of the faith who could be justly enslaved" source

And that still doesn't excuse slavery in the US by Christians.

You also seem quite about Christians who support Trump, while accusing Obama of being anti-christian because he admonishes Christians for their views on gays, and forcing them to pay for women birth control that over 90% of Christian women use.
As much as I'm a passionate pro-lifer, that's respectably not my life passion. If you want to talk more, take me to task in a separate topic. At this point, you're just bringing up extraneous points and character smears to get away from the subject.

You said you were fine when I brought this discussion from the Trump Topic, which was clearly off-topic. And now you are berating me for trying to derail the topic. Hmmm... Alright, Sharia law is basically a law based on religious theology, and I just pointed out how many Christians are voting on immoral politicians because they believe that they will support religious theological laws in the US that bashes gays, keeps out unwanted illegals searching for a better life, and attacks Muslims, takes away welfare from the poor.

I'm fucking agnostic about this shit, and I don't really care about religion, as long as it doesn't afect me.
That explains why you're so quick to discount non-western religious motivations for atrocities. Huh. Well, I wasn't going to say so myself, but that settles it.

Do you even know what the word means? I, basically, said that I don't have a position over religion, so I'm not siding with any of them. I have a much clearer view than someone who religiously defends one of them, while attacking another. I'm much more objective than You. I'm well aware of the faults, and history, of the major religions in this topic. I'm not influenced by emotional, or biased claims.

Replace cherry picking with opinions and you have my feelings on what you've brought to the discussion so far.

So long as you don't disagree with the fact that you are cherry picking, in order to promote your opinion. All I have done is vaguely paid attention to your stuff, while pointing out inconvenient facts to put this shit into proper scale, and watching you make a 101 excuses for your side while doubling down on the other. It's rather comical to watch.