Forced conversions to Islam

[Marcus Aurelius]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHJnJ3WTxf4


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjqrsHRDd_M


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z16sXSrZ4Qo


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dEjxy63DXY


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oax6ye7Yi1c

I guess they are all liars, right Jahil???

[Raman]

Same old sh**

Look at how Christianity spread into Europe under Charlemagne et al

[jimnyc]

Same old sh**

Look at how Christianity spread into Europe under Charlemagne et al

1300 year difference I believe? Come into the present!

[Raman]

As I said, same old sh**

news.bbc.xco.uk/2/hi/south_asia/717775.stm

assamtimesx.org/node/2986

[jimnyc]

As I said, same old sh**

news.bbc.xco.uk/2/hi/south_asia/717775.stm

assamtimesx.org/node/2986

Yep, although 2000 and 2009, it happens in those weird areas. Now let's compare what happens when one leaves the faith, apostasy. While some deny it, in Islam this is likely a death sentence if you can't get away. Sad.

[Marcus Aurelius]

As I said, same old sh**

news.bbc.xco.uk/2/hi/south_asia/717775.stm

assamtimesx.org/node/2986

your links don't work, newb.

[jimnyc]

your links don't work, newb.

You can't post links till you have 5 posts I believe? So he removed the http:// part, but he also added an X in each post (marked in red) and not sure why. Here are the working links:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/717775.stm
http://assamtimes.org/node/2986

[Drummond]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHJnJ3WTxf4


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjqrsHRDd_M


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z16sXSrZ4Qo


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dEjxy63DXY


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oax6ye7Yi1c

I guess they are all liars, right Jahil???

Come on, Jafar. What's your response ?

[Marcus Aurelius]

You can't post links till you have 5 posts I believe? So he removed the http:// part, but he also added an X in each post (marked in red) and not sure why. Here are the working links:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/717775.stm
http://assamtimes.org/node/2986

The first link says nothing about forced conversions. The second does, but it's a terrorist group, one small terrorist group actually. Hardly to be confused with the entire Christian religion. In fact, they act more like... Muslims... in regards to forced conversions.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

As I said, same old sh**

news.bbc.xco.uk/2/hi/south_asia/717775.stm

assamtimesx.org/node/2986

Step off your prayer rug and tell us what you really think..-:laugh:--Tyr

[Marcus Aurelius]

I see the pedophile worshiper Jahil has viewed this thread, but refuses to comment. Maybe he is realizing he has no defense for his false religion in this. Or he's just a coward.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I see the pedophile worshiper Jahil has viewed this thread, but refuses to comment. Maybe he is realizing he has no defense for his false religion in this. Or he's just a coward.

Perhaps he is knee deep on his prayer rug asking Allah, Mohammad and Lucifer for guidance against we infidels and how to destroy the TRUTH presented by those wicked damn infidels..
I fully expect Lucifer to be the only one to reply to his desperate begging for help.--:laugh2:-Tyr

[aboutime]

your links don't work, newb.



Marcus. It appears the Newbe has a one word vocabulary...4808 and is Proud of his accomplishments here.

[Drummond]

Marcus. It appears the Newbe has a one word vocabulary...4808 and is Proud of his accomplishments here.

Well, let's see what else the 'newbe' has to say.

Raman .. do we correctly understand that you're coming from a pro-Islamic viewpoint, and have an interest in furthering that 'cause' ? If so ... care to explain this more ?

If you're actually, seriously, unafraid of holding your beliefs open to scrutiny, then let's hear from you in some detail. Either they can be defended ... or .. not ...

Come on, Raman. What do you have to say to us ? Give it your best shot.

[You might start with something about terrorism. Or, possibly, something on Mohammed's paedophilia ? Just suggestions, you understand .. there may be subjects you'd rather avoid ..]

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Well, let's see what else the 'newbe' has to say.

Raman .. do we correctly understand that you're coming from a pro-Islamic viewpoint, and have an interest in furthering that 'cause' ? If so ... care to explain this more ?

If you're actually, seriously, unafraid of holding your beliefs open to scrutiny, then let's hear from you in some detail. Either they can be defended ... or .. not ...

Come on, Raman. What do you have to say to us ? Give it your best shot.

[You might start with something about terrorism. Or, possibly, something on Mohammed's paedophilia ? Just suggestions, you understand .. there may be subjects you'd rather avoid ..]

I would like to caution that we give this new member Raman a chance to present his views. After all he may be sincere in his beliefs and not so quick to play the game that Jafar has so far engaged in. That of avoiding the hard questions and often quoting Koran verses that do not address the question posed.
Perhaps Raman can better address Steve's questions about the Koran and Islam's founding and history. -Tyr

[Drummond]

I would like to caution that we give this new member Raman a chance to present his views. After all he may be sincere in his beliefs and not so quick to play the game that Jafar has so far engaged in. That of avoiding the hard questions and often quoting Koran verses that do not address the question posed.
Perhaps Raman can better address Steve's questions about the Koran and Islam's founding and history. -Tyr:clap::clap:

Well said.

[jafar00]

Come on, Jafar. What's your response ?

لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ

Deviant groups like the Taliban do not represent nor to they practice Islam. What else needs to be said?

[Marcus Aurelius]

لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ

Deviant groups like the Taliban do not represent nor to they practice Islam. What else needs to be said?

Another typical bullshit response from Jahil. The videos were not all Taliban. But does Jahil care? No, he just lies to try and make Islam look good.

محمد عاشق الاطفال (مولع والاطفال الذين تعرضوا للاعتداء الجنسى)

[jimnyc]

I can't say if forced conversions are all over Islam or in a lot of countries. But I CAN say that death for apostasy and blasphemy is common - and they REALLY need to come up to the civilized world in those matters. You don't KILL people because they choose a different faith than you, or because they insult you. Death and violence is not the answer for religious issues.

[jafar00]

I can't say if forced conversions are all over Islam or in a lot of countries. But I CAN say that death for apostasy and blasphemy is common - and they REALLY need to come up to the civilized world in those matters. You don't KILL people because they choose a different faith than you, or because they insult you. Death and violence is not the answer for religious issues.

I posted from the Qur'aan above "There is no compulsion in Religion". If there are forced conversions or killings for choosing another religion, then they are not getting that from Islam. I know you will blame Islam because some brown people are doing it who call themselves Muslims, but the religion of Islam says differently.

[Marcus Aurelius]

I posted from the Qur'aan above "There is no compulsion in Religion". If there are forced conversions or killings for choosing another religion, then they are not getting that from Islam. I know you will blame Islam because some brown people are doing it who call themselves Muslims, but the religion of Islam says differently.

Once again the 'they are not 'really' Islamic' defense.

Disgusting.

[jimnyc]

I posted from the Qur'aan above "There is no compulsion in Religion". If there are forced conversions or killings for choosing another religion, then they are not getting that from Islam. I know you will blame Islam because some brown people are doing it who call themselves Muslims, but the religion of Islam says differently.

I didn't say it was in the Quran. But it happens ALL THE TIME, and it's ALWAYS within Islam. It's problematic - or is it ok to dismiss it, because it's not in the Quran? No other group of people, actively in so many countries, kill people for blasphemy or for apostasy.

Or would it make you happy if I state that the extreme overwhelming majority of people, who are killing others for apostasy and blasphemy, are Muslims, even though it is not taught via the religion to do so.

Look, Jafar, you can twist this subject around every time we bring it up. But in the end - EVERY TIME - it is clear, that these are people that call themselves Muslims, they live in Islamic ruled countries and regions.

YOU always bring up the crusades. Can I deny that it ever happened as you write it, as it's not in the Bible, and not the Christian way, so therefore it never happened.

[jimnyc]

Once again the 'they are not 'really' Islamic' defense.

Disgusting.

and yet if you looked up the last 10,000 people to be killed for apostasy or blasphemy - it's just a coincidence that they are Muslim or it takes place in an Islamic nation.

This is exactly why it remains such an issue, like others, because it's refused to be looked at as a problem and far too many turn a blind eye as a result.

[jimnyc]

In Islamic law (sharia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia)), the consensus view was that a male apostate must be put to death unless he suffers from a mental disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_disorder) or converted under duress, for example, due to an imminent danger of being killed. A female apostate must be either executed, according to Shafi'i (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shafi%27i), Maliki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maliki), and Hanbali (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanbali) schools of Sunni (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunni) Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiqh)), or imprisoned until she reverts to Islam as advocated by the Sunni Hanafi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanafi) school and by Shi'a (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shi%27a) scholars.[60] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam#cite_note-EI_Murtadd-60) A minority of medieval Islamic jurists, notably the Hanafi jurist Sarakhsi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarakhsi) (d. 1090),[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam#cite_note-Saeed-12) Maliki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maliki) jurist Ibn al-Walid al-Baji (d. 494 AH) and Hanbali (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanbali) jurist Ibn Taymiyyah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Taymiyyah) (1263–1328), held that apostasy carries no legal punishment.[61] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam#cite_note-Kamali-61)

Contemporary Islamic Shafi`i (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shafi%60i) jurists such as the Grand Mufti (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Mufti) Ali Gomaa (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Gomaa),[62] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam#cite_note-Gomaa-62)[63] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam#cite_note-Tawab-63) Shi'a (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shi%27a_Islam) jurists such as Grand Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Ayatollah_Hossein-Ali_Montazeri),[64] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam#cite_note-Jami-64) and some jurists, scholars and writers of other Islamic sects (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divisions_of_Islam), have argued or issued fatwas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatwa) that either the changing of religion is not punishable or is only punishable under restricted circumstances, but these minority opinions have not found broad acceptance among the majority of Islamic scholars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulema)

I'm guessing now that sharia is no longer Islam? Another Muslim member of ours has stated that Islam and Sharia are inseparable, one and the same.

And it looks like blasphemy is certainly written in the Quran AND the punishment...


Blasphemy against God Islamic law makes a distinction between a blasphemer who insults God and a blasphemer who finds fault with Muhammad. The distinction is based on the notions of the "right of God" and the "right of Man." Reviling God violates the "right of God," who has the power to avenge the insult. Reviling Muhammad violates the "right of Man," who, in the case of Muhammad, does not have the power to avenge the insult. A blasphemer who violates the "right of God" can seek forgiveness through repentance.[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_blasphemy#cite_note-Saeed-2)
The Qur'an speaks of punishment in relation to those who make mischief in opposition to God and Muhammad:

The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter, Except for those who return repenting before you apprehend them. And know that Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (5:33-34)

—Qur'an, sura (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sura) 5 (Al-Ma'ida (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ma%27ida)), ayah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayah) 33-34



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_blasphemy

These quick Wiki entries are the tip of the iceberg. Death in Islam for Apostasy and Blasphemy is happening non-stop around the world, although it may not happen in places like Australia.

[jafar00]

I'm guessing now that sharia is no longer Islam? Another Muslim member of ours has stated that Islam and Sharia are inseparable, one and the same.

And it looks like blasphemy is certainly written in the Quran AND the punishment...



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_blasphemy

These quick Wiki entries are the tip of the iceberg. Death in Islam for Apostasy and Blasphemy is happening non-stop around the world, although it may not happen in places like Australia.

So waging war is considered blasphemy now?

[Little-Acorn]

Same old sh**

Look at how Christianity spread into Europe under Charlemagne et al

A first-time poster, and all he does is try to hijack a thread and change the subject?
Great. We need more of those. :facepalm99:

[Raman]

Well, let's see what else the 'newbe' has to say.

Raman .. do we correctly understand that you're coming from a pro-Islamic viewpoint, and have an interest in furthering that 'cause' ? If so ... care to explain this more ?

If you're actually, seriously, unafraid of holding your beliefs open to scrutiny, then let's hear from you in some detail. Either they can be defended ... or .. not ...

Come on, Raman. What do you have to say to us ? Give it your best shot.

[You might start with something about terrorism. Or, possibly, something on Mohammed's paedophilia ? Just suggestions, you understand .. there may be subjects you'd rather avoid ..]


Religion- organized religion, in particular- is a cancer upon mankind, furthering ignorance, backwardness, and blind obedience to authority and tyranny. it keeps people separate and makes mutual understanding and cooperation near impossible in cases where compromise and reason might otherwise succeed. The Jewish religion, with its commands to carry out genocide in Canaan, and its offshoots, variations, and derivatives (the Christian and Muslim umbrellas), has been at the world of many of the world's ills for three thousand years, and likely will continue to be for a thousand more.


As I said, same old sh**.


Religious war, like most war, is only about the religion, conversion, or other stated cause for the man on the front lines. For those giving the orders, commanding from afar, it's usually more about expanding their control over land, resources, and people. Whether it's dressed up in the colors of nationalism, religion, or class war, it's all the same old sh** in the end- greed, ignorance, and senseless violence.


لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ

Deviant groups like the Taliban do not represent nor to they practice Islam. What else needs to be said?

So what you're saying is that no true scottsman would ever drink water?


I can't say if forced conversions are all over Islam or in a lot of countries. But I CAN say that death for apostasy and blasphemy is common - and they REALLY need to come up to the civilized world in those matters. You don't KILL people because they choose a different faith than you, or because they insult you. Death and violence is not the answer for religious issues.

So the answer to religious issues and the key to civil advance is to abandon millenniua-old superstitions and apply reason, logic, and empathy in place of ignorance and child-like belief in invisible friends- and possibly stop listening to voicess from the sky and burning bushes that noone else can hear?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Religion- organized religion, in particular- is a cancer upon mankind, furthering ignorance, backwardness, and blind obedience to authority and tyranny. it keeps people separate and makes mutual understanding and cooperation near impossible in cases where compromise and reason might otherwise succeed. The Jewish religion, with its commands to carry out genocide in Canaan, and its offshoots, variations, and derivatives (the Christian and Muslim umbrellas), has been at the world of many of the world's ills for three thousand years, and likely will continue to be for a thousand more.


As I said, same old sh**.


Religious war, like most war, is only about the religion, conversion, or other stated cause for the man on the front lines. For those giving the orders, commanding from afar, it's usually more about expanding their control over land, resources, and people. Whether it's dressed up in the colors of nationalism, religion, or class war, it's all the same old sh** in the end- greed, ignorance, and senseless violence.



So what you're saying is that no true scottsman would ever drink water?



So the answer to religious issues and the key to civil advance is to abandon millenniua-old superstitions and apply reason, logic, and empathy in place of ignorance and child-like belief in invisible friends- and possibly stop listening to voicess from the sky and burning bushes that noone else can hear?

Grrrrrrreat. Another , religion is the curse of the world.
Science and Sanity save us.

As if science and man's progress does not owe a huge debt to the civilizing influence of the Christian religion.

Well , at least you did not give Islam a total pass as so many that think like you most often do. I give you 2 points for that...--Tyr

[jimnyc]

So waging war is considered blasphemy now?

Don't be obtuse, waging war against Allah is another term for talking smack about him (or Muhammed). It's not literally "war".


The Qur'an speaks of punishment in relation to those who make mischief in opposition to God and Muhammad:
The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter, Except for those who return repenting before you apprehend them. And know that Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (5:33-34)

I am on the phone with a Muslim friend as I type this. Are you SURE you want to deny this is in reference to Blasphemy? Also, keep in mind, if you go to the link I posted, it's even under the description of blasphemy in Islam!!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_blasphemy

[jimnyc]

So the answer to religious issues and the key to civil advance is to abandon millenniua-old superstitions and apply reason, logic, and empathy in place of ignorance and child-like belief in invisible friends- and possibly stop listening to voicess from the sky and burning bushes that noone else can hear?

Actually, it's easier. People should simply stop killing and abusing one another. Don't kill and claim it's based on religion and don't abuse people and blame the religion. Then you simply live and let live.

[jimnyc]

So waging war is considered blasphemy now?

So the answer is YES, and I can give a TON more of evidence from within Islam itself. And don't think I didn't notice you cut off the portion about apostasy in your reply in the hopes it would quietly go away. I don't blame you, as if you deny it, you are denying Sharia. Tough spot! :)

[Drummond]

So waging war is considered blasphemy now?

For a true 'religion of peace', you'd surely have to wonder why it wasn't !!

[jimnyc]

For a true 'religion of peace', you'd surely have to wonder why it wasn't !!

I spoke to a Moroccan and a Jordanian today. Both say that blasphemy is one of the worst things a Muslim can do, to speak badly of Allah or Muhammed. They said in some places it could be a fine, or prison time - and in many other places it could lead to lashes, stoning or another death sentence. But yes, they confirmed that blasphemy alone, simply speaking bad of them, is part of Sharia and should never be done, regardless of the consequences, as it is written not to do so.

Now, the 3rd guy I spoke with, from the Holy Land of Saudi Arabia. He put it this way to me in reference to Apostasy - he said you would be better off leaving the country before you made any such pronouncement. Doing so within the kingdom, and you may find yourself missing, or just publicly killed. And he said it is like this in MANY more places than just the Holy Land, as this too is written in Sharia, which according to him, ALL Muslims should be observing, as Sharia and Islam are one and the same.

Amazing how you get different versions depending on who you speak to!

[Marcus Aurelius]

I spoke to a Moroccan and a Jordanian today. Both say that blasphemy is one of the worst things a Muslim can do, to speak badly of Allah or Muhammed. They said in some places it could be a fine, or prison time - and in many other places it could lead to lashes, stoning or another death sentence. But yes, they confirmed that blasphemy alone, simply speaking bad of them, is part of Sharia and should never be done, regardless of the consequences, as it is written not to do so.

Now, the 3rd guy I spoke with, from the Holy Land of Saudi Arabia. He put it this way to me in reference to Apostasy - he said you would be better off leaving the country before you made any such pronouncement. Doing so within the kingdom, and you may find yourself missing, or just publicly killed. And he said it is like this in MANY more places than just the Holy Land, as this too is written in Sharia, which according to him, ALL Muslims should be observing, as Sharia and Islam are one and the same.

Amazing how you get different versions depending on who you speak to!

Lies... all lies! Jahil is the ultimate authority on what is and is not Islam. Just ask him!

[Drummond]

Religion- organized religion, in particular- is a cancer upon mankind, furthering ignorance, backwardness, and blind obedience to authority and tyranny. it keeps people separate and makes mutual understanding and cooperation near impossible in cases where compromise and reason might otherwise succeed. The Jewish religion, with its commands to carry out genocide in Canaan, and its offshoots, variations, and derivatives (the Christian and Muslim umbrellas), has been at the world of many of the world's ills for three thousand years, and likely will continue to be for a thousand more.

We have some definite 'thread drift' going on here. But, to be fair .. I did ask to know more about your views, didn't I .. and you've delivered ...

Your thinking isn't a million miles away from what my own used to be, decades ago. But the proper reflection suggests a different reality to the one you believe in.

You hate religion, this is clear. You hate any organisation of it, too, meaning, you hate order and coherence attributed to it. BUT, I suggest to you that the evidence you're wrong is to be found in every atom of existence. Order, indeed, is THE most remarkable constant of everything defining your existence. And mine. And everybody's.

Laws of nature exist. HOW ? The Universe itself exists, and sprang from a definite moment. Again, HOW ?

You live on a planet that sustains your life, that is so ordered that such sustinence is even possible. By 'accident' ?

So much of all that exists is structured. Design is literally everywhere. But ... design, BY ACCIDENT ? This is surely a self-defeating concept.


Religious war, like most war, is only about the religion, conversion, or other stated cause for the man on the front lines. For those giving the orders, commanding from afar, it's usually more about expanding their control over land, resources, and people. Whether it's dressed up in the colors of nationalism, religion, or class war, it's all the same old sh** in the end- greed, ignorance, and senseless violence.

Maybe there's truth in this. But you can't generalise to such an extent and remain credible. There WILL HAVE BEEN those who fight for principle, for decent standards. You can't possibly, believably, say otherwise for all instances.


So what you're saying is that no true scottsman would ever drink water?

I speak as an Englishman myself. My view is that somewhere, if you look hard enough, you will eventually find a Scotsman who drinks water.


So the answer to religious issues and the key to civil advance is to abandon millenniua-old superstitions and apply reason, logic, and empathy in place of ignorance and child-like belief in invisible friends- and possibly stop listening to voicess from the sky and burning bushes that noone else can hear?

Here's a question which is meant to appeal to your capacity for reason. As follows:-

Is it reasonable to suppose that everything comes from, literally, NOTHING ?

Think about it.

[jimnyc]

Lies... all lies! Jahil is the ultimate authority on what is and is not Islam. Just ask him!

I know, I know - my friends aren't Muslims! They all agree that Iranian's aren't Muslims, but as soon as they disagree with what the other says, then one of them will no longer be Muslims. In theory I like the idea. I can think of a lot of people that shouldn't be Catholic, or American, and would like to declare them invalid. :laugh:

[Drummond]

I spoke to a Moroccan and a Jordanian today. Both say that blasphemy is one of the worst things a Muslim can do, to speak badly of Allah or Muhammed. They said in some places it could be a fine, or prison time - and in many other places it could lead to lashes, stoning or another death sentence. But yes, they confirmed that blasphemy alone, simply speaking bad of them, is part of Sharia and should never be done, regardless of the consequences, as it is written not to do so.

Now, the 3rd guy I spoke with, from the Holy Land of Saudi Arabia. He put it this way to me in reference to Apostasy - he said you would be better off leaving the country before you made any such pronouncement. Doing so within the kingdom, and you may find yourself missing, or just publicly killed. And he said it is like this in MANY more places than just the Holy Land, as this too is written in Sharia, which according to him, ALL Muslims should be observing, as Sharia and Islam are one and the same.

Amazing how you get different versions depending on who you speak to!

'Amazing', also, that such intolerant savagery is a part of the modern world. But, well, this IS Islam we're talking about. Certain fossilisations of thought and attitude are to be expected from a 'faith' so centred on success through conquest, be it through religious warfare, terrorism, or the spread of its influence through social coercion.

I suggest that simply quitting a hostile territory is often of itself not nearly enough to protect against Islamic excesses. I take it you know of Salman Rushdie, author of 'Satanic Verses' ? Not that his case was one of outright Apostacy, but, he wrote something which was considered highly offensive to Islam. Result .. he had a Fatwa issued against him, and spent much of his life wondering if a Muslim was going to come along and shorten it for him.

I say: a 'religion' which cannot tolerate dissention, criticism, treats its 'membership' as though they're all part of some sick protection racket (.. and a paedophilia-revering one at that !!!) ... is not worthy of the name 'religion' at all. It's just an evil tyranny.

[Drummond]

So waging war is considered blasphemy now?

From a 'religion of peace' .. of course, the answer should ultimately work out to be ... 'YES'.

Of course, for Islam, that's a ludicrous assertion ....


Those who readily fight in the cause of God are those who forsake this world in favor of the Hereafter. Whoever fights in the cause of God, then gets killed, or attains victory, we will surely grant him a great recompense.<cite style="font-style: normal; font-weight: bold; margin: 5px 0px 0px;">Qur'an 4:74</cite>


Or ...


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.<cite style="font-style: normal; font-weight: bold; margin: 5px 0px 0px;">Qur'an 47:4</cite>

Such 'fun' people to be in the company of ... eh ?

That second Quran piece strikes me as being a little confused. Maybe Mohammed was a bit addled at the time .. suffering from exhaustion from his latest paedophiliac excesses, or maybe he'd just had a few too many to drink that day ? Because it seems to me that today's kidnapping terrorists prove how much of a nonsense this order of things is. We all know what truly happens ... some victim or other is taken prisoner, a form of ransom is demanded (either conditions to be satisfied, or payment supplied, or both ..) .. and THEN, if they don't get their way, then 'necks are smited' (i.e the victim is beheaded). And ... regardless of any claim that they're being un-Islamic, those terrorists going around head-chopping claim to be waging their war 'for an Islamic cause'.

Perhaps Quran 47:4 is proof that terrorism IS AN ISLAMIC ACTIVITY ? I rather think so, myself ....

... don't you, Jafar .. ?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Religion- organized religion, in particular- is a cancer upon mankind, furthering ignorance, backwardness, and blind obedience to authority and tyranny. it keeps people separate and makes mutual understanding and cooperation near impossible in cases where compromise and reason might otherwise succeed.

ACTUALLY, that is human nature and human vices in action more so than ever it was religion.


As I said, same old sh**.

Same 'ole sh** applies to all people be they religious or not.


Religious war, like most war, is only about the religion, conversion, or other stated cause for the man on the front lines. For those giving the orders, commanding from afar, it's usually more about expanding their control over land, resources, and people. Whether it's dressed up in the colors of nationalism, religion, or class war, it's all the same old sh** in the end- greed, ignorance, and senseless violence.

All wars have been about taking something that belongs to another be it wealth, territory, freedom, religion etc. Only exception to that is wars fought simply for survival and even then that exception exists for only one party in the conflict.



So what you're saying is that no true scottsman would ever drink water?

There are lies, lies and LIES. TRUTH defeats them all regardless of their origins or purposes in being told..




So the answer to religious issues and the key to civil advance is to abandon millenniua-old superstitions and apply reason, logic, and empathy in place of ignorance and child-like belief in invisible friends- and possibly stop listening to voicess from the sky and burning bushes that noone else can hear?

That great impossible task has been man's answer to defeating his evil nature for thousands of years. So far it has always given only a harvest of very bitter fruit that yielded not only no seeds but more death and misery than most people can imagine.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Man can not save himself. Man can not solve his problems with science or any other force created from his own efforts. We are inherently so damn flawed as to always end up being our own worst enemy regardless of how or what we try to do to maintain a lasting peace and secure prosperous life for mankind.
HISTORY REPEATEDLY PROVES THE TRUTH OF THAT IMHO. -Tyr

[Raman]

The Universe itself exists, and sprang from a definite moment. Again, HOW ?

Personally, I recognize M-theory as the best model yet constructed from the available evidence.


You live on a planet that sustains your life, that is so ordered that such sustinence is even possible. By 'accident' ?

Life evolved to survive in its respective environments




So much of all that exists is structured. Design is literally everywhere. But ... design, BY ACCIDENT ? This is surely a self-defeating concept.

Who said anything about an accident? Accidents require intent. Only you claim such a thing



I speak as an Englishman myself. My view is that somewhere, if you look hard enough, you will eventually find a Scotsman who drinks water.


I was speaking to jafar...


Here's a question which is meant to appeal to your capacity for reason. As follows:-

Is it reasonable to suppose that everything comes from, literally, NOTHING ?


Who claims that? You, apparently, and the Christians., who claim god made everything from nothing.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Raman are you American? Are you atheist? Are you afraid to answer my reply to you?
Are you a sock for a certain drive by poster we have here? :laugh:

[jafar00]

From a 'religion of peace' .. of course, the answer should ultimately work out to be ... 'YES'.

Of course, for Islam, that's a ludicrous assertion ....



Or ...



Such 'fun' people to be in the company of ... eh ?

That second Quran piece strikes me as being a little confused. Maybe Mohammed was a bit addled at the time .. suffering from exhaustion from his latest paedophiliac excesses, or maybe he'd just had a few too many to drink that day ? Because it seems to me that today's kidnapping terrorists prove how much of a nonsense this order of things is. We all know what truly happens ... some victim or other is taken prisoner, a form of ransom is demanded (either conditions to be satisfied, or payment supplied, or both ..) .. and THEN, if they don't get their way, then 'necks are smited' (i.e the victim is beheaded). And ... regardless of any claim that they're being un-Islamic, those terrorists going around head-chopping claim to be waging their war 'for an Islamic cause'.

Perhaps Quran 47:4 is proof that terrorism IS AN ISLAMIC ACTIVITY ? I rather think so, myself ....

... don't you, Jafar .. ?


And the rest of 47:4 reads..

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 does it mean?
The verse was revealed after the battle of Uhud which didn't go so well for the Muslims.

God could have just destroyed the Meccan Army that day, but instead let the men fight to test them. Those who fell, fighting to defend themselves and Islam were granted a place in Paradise.

The neck thing is not a command to go around beheading people. It was just the most common way you got killed in those days in battle. A sword or spear to the neck was not conducive to survival.
This is a verse about a historical battle and a reminder of the strength of their faith.

Now, if only I could get you to have a discussion without the childish insults, I would appreciate it. :poke:

[aboutime]

Personally, I recognize M-theory as the best model yet constructed from the available evidence.
Life evolved to survive in its respective environments


Who said anything about an accident? Accidents require intent. Only you claim such a thing
I was speaking to jafar...


Who claims that? You, apparently, and the Christians., who claim god made everything from nothing.


4822 Doesn't sound like an accident that you are something other than who you wish us to believe you are.