SHOCK! MUSLIMs OUTRAGED!

[OGTEleven]

Yes.

 

Did India get it?  The Carribean?

779440[/snapback]

Reggae music could easily be construed as a form of terrorism.

[GG]

Reggae music could easily be construed as a form of terrorism.

779450[/snapback]

 

this coming from a guy who worships Reeba McIntyre? (or whatever the country flavor of the moment)

[pdh1]

Reggae music could easily be construed as a form of terrorism.

779450[/snapback]

 

Beats hip hop

[pdh1]

So Britain promoted free thinking and open discussion among all citizens in all of its colonies and somehow the dumb "stuck in the 7th century" natives didn't get it, right?

779386[/snapback]

 

 

 

Hello? Today calling.... What year is it?

[Chilly]

Uh, no.  I'd expect more from Tom Petty's newest fan.  The general statement is made by Islam (not me) when they call themselves "The religion of peace."

 

And in many ways, they are. However, while I have heard the term "religion of peace", I haven't ever heard which sect(s) are actually using that term. It makes a big difference who uses it.

 

Speaking of Tom Petty, since a bunch of people were wondering, I'll make a post on that later today in off-topic. Saw him on Sunday night.

 

Would you at least agree that the religion has some problems surrounding it?  Muslims must be an integral part of turning away from the people that are calling for the death of the Pope (and killing Danish authors, etc.).  Right now that is not happening.  This is causing a problem for the whole religion even if its vast majority is not part of the problem. 

 

To be honest, I'm not sure what to think about that. I have a feeling that the press has a lot to do with us not hearing about it.

 

I haven't seen anything in the newspapers that I read interviewing peaceful American muslim leaders at all. Seems to me that its a better story if they don't, one that sells more newspapers.

 

I'm willing to give parts of the religion the benefit of the doubt here, as I believe that the media isn't exactly enclined to promote the more moderate messages.

 

I'd also say that if Catholicism was called the "Religion of non-pedophiles" that is was a misnomer even though most priests and Catholics do not molest children.  They would and do have some fence mending in store.

779031[/snapback]

 

While I understand your point, I don't agree with it. I would argue that Catholicism is but one interpretation of Christianity. You're labeling a section of Christianity, Catholicism, instead of all of Christianity.

 

I think this is a big problem in this discussion. Americans generally don't have a great understanding of the different types/variations/interpretations of Islam and the Qur'an, as we just aren't exposed to it culturally. I know that I, for one, wish that I had a better understanding of the different variations, rather then just general ideas of the differences between sects.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

I know that I, for one, wish that I had a better understanding of the different variations, rather then just general ideas of the differences between sects.

779515[/snapback]

 

Here's all you need to know:

 

Sunni: Blows himself up to ensure that Shiites, Christians, Jews and atheists can never have a chance in this world.

 

Shiite: Blows himself up to ensure that Sunnis, Christians, Jews and atheists can never have a chance in this world.

[Chilly]

Here's all you need to know:

 

Sunni: Blows himself up to ensure that Shiites, Christians, Jews and atheists can never have a chance in this world.

 

Shiite: Blows himself up to ensure that Sunnis, Christians, Jews and atheists can never have a chance in this world.

779573[/snapback]

 

Thanks for proving my point JSP. This is exactly the type of stupid bull sh-- that I was referring to.

 

Shi'a Islam has in itself multiple sects, including Jafari, Ismailiyah, Zaiddiyah, Alawi, and Alevi.

 

Sunni Islam has multiple Madhabs, including Shaf'i, Hanbali, Maliki, and Hanafi.

 

Not to mention other interpretations of Islam including Sufi, Kahrijites, Nizari, and more.

[yall]

Thanks for proving my point JSP.  This is exactly the type of stupid bull sh-- that I was referring to.

 

Shi'a Islam has in itself multiple sects, including Jafari, Ismailiyah, Zaiddiyah, Alawi, and Alevi. 

 

Sunni Islam has multiple Madhabs, including Shaf'i, Hanbali, Maliki, and Hanafi.

 

Not to mention other interpretations of Islam including Sufi, Kahrijites, Nizari, and more.

779606[/snapback]

 

Here is a well thought out comment from faithfreedom.org on the different interpretations of islam. (This is basically what I said many posts ago, that "peaceful muslims" are the ones who are not "true" muslims):

 

18- But there are other versions of Islam. Not all Muslims are fanatics. There are many Muslims who are liberals, who believe in human rights and equality of gender. You cannot condemn all the Muslims.

 

The Islam I am opposing is the Islam of the Prophet Muhammad and what he taught in Quran. I am not concerned about other versions of Islam. Islam cannot be changed. You only can change Islam when you change Quran. Trying to humanize Islam is like trying to humanize Nazism. Representing Islam as a tolerant and humanistic religion is lying. Can you put the foundation of human happiness on lies?

 

Quran and Hadith say that women are less than men; they are deficient in intelligence and beat your wives. How can you preach equality without changing what is in Quran?

 

Quran demands killing the disbelievers, waging war on them until everyone converts to Islam or is "subdued, feels humiliated and pay Jizyah", How can you build an Islam that talks about tolerance, but neglect the inhumanities of Quran? It is like saying, let us discover the “liberal” Nazism in which everybody is loving and gentle, and there is no racial hostility. If you want to fool yourself go ahead but you won’t be able to fool others. If you are so much attached to Islam, live by it. Don’t try to change it and pick and choose what pleases you most. If you are unsatisfied with what you see, may be it is time to move on. The true Muslim was Khomeini.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Quran and Hadith say that women are less than men; they are deficient in intelligence and beat your wives. How can you preach equality without changing what is in Quran?

 

Quran demands killing the disbelievers, waging war on them until everyone converts to Islam or is "subdued, feels humiliated and pay Jizyah"

779731[/snapback]

 

And it says that in the Koran and Hadith where?

[RuntheDamnBall]

Hello? Today calling.... What year is it?

779495[/snapback]

Typical. Welcome to pdh1's world: where history has no bearing on the present.

 

Here's more where that came from: In our advanced, ideal society, blacks have always had it great (hey, those lynchings were like 40 years ago, ancient history! Today calling!). Women have always been equals in Western society (aside from earning 75% of what a man does --and they've always had the vote (for the last 86 years)).

 

It's beginning to appear obvious as to how you've developed your worldview.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

It's beginning to appear obvious as to how you've developed your worldview.

779774[/snapback]

 

Randomly?

[yall]

And it says that in the Koran and Hadith where?

779734[/snapback]

 

I don't know why I'm bothering to respond to you, since you have refused to respond to my queries, but what the heck, I'm game.

 

Koran, chapter 4:34

 

"Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in their sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great."

 

As far as the killing and taxation of non-believers, you seem like a bright guy, try a search engine. If you haven't been convinced by now that islam is not a very peaceful religion, and you care to ignore the violent history of its founder, then I highly doubt there are enought links or proof to change your mind.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

I don't know why I'm bothering to respond to you, since you have refused to respond to my queries, but what the heck, I'm game.

 

Koran, chapter 4:34

 

"Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in their sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great."

779799[/snapback]

 

Of course, if you'd read the entire chapter, you'd have noticed that women have the right to own property, to inheritance, to free will and self-determination. The punishments for women outlined in the chapter are actually less harsh than those outlined for men. The Koran actually goes to great lengths to protect women; had you managed to find a better translation of it, you may have found that the Arabic in 4:35 doesn't read "and beat them", but reads "and as a last resort, punish them gently and without harm" (literally, as best I can make it out with my weak Arabic skills, "as a last resort, admonish them weakly, like a young camel").

 

That...is actually pretty damned gentle and protective, particularly compared to Leviticus 20, which basically says "If she steps out of line, kill the B word." Those damn, evil, abusive Judeo-Christians.

 

As far as the killing and taxation of non-believers, you seem like a bright guy, try a search engine. If you haven't been convinced by now that islam is not a very peaceful religion, and you care to ignore the violent history of its founder, then I highly doubt there are enought links or proof to change your mind.

 

Trust me, I've searched. I just want you to explain it to me...mostly because I know the chapter and verse you're referring to, and I'd like to point out to you how egregiously wrong you are. Again. Still.

[Wacka]

Thanks for proving my point JSP.  This is exactly the type of stupid bull sh-- that I was referring to.

 

Shi'a Islam has in itself multiple sects, including Jafari, Ismailiyah, Zaiddiyah, Alawi, and Alevi. 

 

Sunni Islam has multiple Madhabs, including Shaf'i, Hanbali, Maliki, and Hanafi.

 

Not to mention other interpretations of Islam including Sufi, Kahrijites, Nizari, and more.

779606[/snapback]

 

I don't care what they call temselves. just tell me which ones want to kill us!

[ExiledInIllinois]

I don't care what they call temselves. just tell me which ones want to kill us!

779946[/snapback]

 

From Iran's supreme leader...

 

"Those who benefit from the pope's comments and drive their own arrogant policies should be targeted with attacks and protests," he said, referring to the United Sates.

[yall]

Trust me, I've searched.  I just want you to explain it to me...mostly because I know the chapter and verse you're referring to, and I'd like to point out to you how egregiously wrong you are.  Again.  Still.

779926[/snapback]

 

It's common known that english translations add the word "lightly" to that passage, although it is not there in the arabic version. Muslims should be outraged that their holy book is being tampered with. And don't give me the "you just have to be able to read it in arabic to appreciate it" line. Although I do believe in certain words not tranlating well between english and arabic, IRONY being one.

 

I'm still waiting for you to address the violent history of the prophet and reconcile that with what are considered very clear interpretations of passages such as this:

 

Koran 5:33

"The Punishment for those who oppose Allah and his messenger is : Execution or Crucifixion or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides or exile from the land"

 

Now with that one you could say that's your punishment once you get to hell, so may mohammed didn't command it, but it was instead a warning. But that doesn't explain this one:

 

Sura 9:29

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold forbidden that which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued"

 

Again, the words of the prophet.

 

"So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates. That (shall be so); and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have exacted what is due from them, but that He may try some of you by means of others; and (as for) those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish."

 

And let me get this straight: I'm supposed to respect a religion created by a guy who had no respect for other religions? Didn't mohammed smash the idols that were worshipped by some polytheists?

 

"Surely the number of months with Allah is twelve months in Allah's ordinance since the day when He created the heavens and the earth, of these four being sacred; that is the right reckoning; therefore be not unjust to yourselves regarding them, and fight the polytheists all together as they fight you all together; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil)."

 

I could go on all day with these types of passages, and these aren't even the good ones. Seriously, the founder was violent, sanctioned killings, participated in forcible conversions, extortion, and participated in open warfare. You can't combine those FACTS with the contents of the holy books, and tell people with a straight face it is a religion of peace and tolerance.

[outsidethebox]

That...is actually pretty damned gentle and protective, particularly compared to Leviticus 20, which basically says "If she steps out of line, kill the B word."

 

 

Please show me where in Leviticus 20 it "basically" says "to kill the B word"?

 

You accuse someone of taking the koran out of context and then say this?

 

Pot meet mr kettle.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

It's common known that english translations add the word "lightly" to that passage, although it is not there in the arabic version. Muslims should be outraged that their holy book is being tampered with.

 

Muslims aren't outraged that their holy book is being tampered with, because they don't recognize it written in anything other than the Arabic script...so it's impossible to "tamper" with it in English. And yes, the word "lightly" is added in translation..but so is the word "beat".

 

And don't give me the "you just have to be able to read it in arabic to appreciate it" line. Although I do believe in certain words not tranlating well between english and arabic, IRONY being one.

 

Then I'll just tell you to get off your ignorant ass and learn Arabic. You're actually arguing about translation when you don't know anything about the language? You think you're an expert on Islam because you take at face value an idomatic translation you found on the internet by an uncredited source of a metaphorical statement?

 

Koran 5:33

"The Punishment for those who oppose Allah and his messenger is : Execution or Crucifixion or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides or exile from the land"

 

Now with that one you could say that's your punishment once you get to hell, so may mohammed didn't command it, but it was instead a warning. But that doesn't explain this one:

 

I could say that...except that 1) it wouldn't be true, and 2) you've got a bad translation anyway. The phrase actually begins, "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger..." The statement in Arabic does not refer to disagreement (which the Koran doesn't recognize betwen Judaism, Christianity, and Islam anyway), but to active opposition - oppression, basically. Again, if you'd actually learn something about it instead of parroting what others tell you, you might know this.

 

Sura 9:29

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold forbidden that which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued"

/quote]

 

Taxing heretics? Gee...that almost never happens. Though really, "jizya" is a slippery term; it's usually translated as "tax", sometimes "tribute", very occasionally "vassalage". Its purpose, though, wasn't oppressive; in fact, the jizya as defined is less (in both relative and absolute terms) than the contributions required by a full Muslim. It actually has more than a little in common with the feudalism of the Middle Ages, save being enforced along religious rather than class lines.

 

 

"So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates. That (shall be so); and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have exacted what is due from them, but that He may try some of you by means of others; and (as for) those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish."

 

What part of "in battle" did you not understand. "In battle." Warfare. When you fight a war against pagans, take them prisoner, and let them go when the war is over. Really brutal code there. Scandalously vicious.

 

Keep in mind, too, that the Koran recognizes Jews and Christians as people of the Book, not pagans or "those who disbelieve".

 

And let me get this straight: I'm supposed to respect a religion created by a guy who had no respect for other religions? Didn't mohammed smash the idols that were worshipped by some polytheists?

779978[/snapback]

 

Yeah, that Judeo-Christian monotheistic ethic is a real B word when it comes to polytheism, isn't it?

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

That...is actually pretty damned gentle and protective, particularly compared to Leviticus 20, which basically says "If she steps out of line, kill the B word."

Please show me where in Leviticus 20 it "basically" says "to kill the B word"?

 

You accuse someone of taking the koran out of context and then say this?

 

Pot meet mr kettle. 

779985[/snapback]

 

You MUST be kidding. "Kill the B word" was obvious (I thought ) hyperbole...but fully half the verses in Leviticus 20 are variations of "Your wife shall be put to death for..."

[ExiledInIllinois]

You MUST be kidding.  "Kill the B word" was obvious (I thought  ) hyperbole...but fully half the verses in Leviticus 20 are variations of "Your wife shall be put to death for..."

780202[/snapback]

 

We get a towboat, the Leviticus that comes through from down south... I think a lot of deckhands have been reading some of the verses in that book after spending 4 weeks on while DDing their paycheck back home...

 

I say... "What are you gonna do with all that money you got waiting for you when you get home after spending a month on the boat."

 

You know what they say... Yep... You guessed it:

 

"Kill that B word!"