View Full Version : Is Islam a Religion of Peace?
Like this article states not all Muslims are our enemy but the numbers that are are growing at a rapid rate and until the peaceful Muslims stand up and take back there Peaceful image it will continue to make them all look bad .
Early Sunday morning, gunmen crept onto a college campus in northeastern Nigeria and murdered about 40 male college students (http://ca.news.yahoo.com/gunmen-kill-least-26-attack-nigerian-college-110107103.html), some of them while they were still asleep in their beds. The bodies were carried from the school to the hospital about 30 miles away. A witness said that he counted 40 bloody bodies stacked on the floor of the hospital in the local capital of Damaturu on Sunday. Most of the deceased were young men who were likely students at the school. The bodies were found in the dorms, classrooms, and in the bushes surrounding the school, a staff member told Reuters. The city of Damaturu is in the northeastern part of Nigeria, about 130 miles from the nation’s border with Cameroon and Niger.
As you can likely imagine, there is no “good” reason for the vicious slaughter of these innocent boys. I’m also sure you won’t be surprised to learn that the culprits are a group called Boko Haram, an Islamist militant organization with close ties to other terrorist groups, like Al-Qaeda. Boko Haram’s main goal in Nigeria (besides death, destruction, murder and plunder) is to establish an Islamic theocratic state in northern Nigeria. They’ve recently intensified their attacks on innocent civilians because the Nigerian military has been beating them on the battlefield. It’s believed that they have focused on schools because they think the schools are where Western-style education and culture is being cultivated.
http://eaglerising.com/2021/islam-religion-peace/
jafar00
10-01-2013, 08:01 PM
Isn't this a duplicate of another thread with the same subject?
Besides, all this incident proves is that Boko Haram is the enemy of Nigerian Muslims.
stevecanuck
10-01-2013, 08:06 PM
The answer is very simply, "NO". Mohamed taught and made war. It's a matter of the historical record and can't be denied.
Isn't this a duplicate of another thread with the same subject?
Besides, all this incident proves is that Boko Haram is the enemy of Nigerian Muslims.
jafar if it is a duplicate I apologize I had never seen it before or don't remember
Isn't this a duplicate of another thread with the same subject?
Besides, all this incident proves is that Boko Haram is the enemy of Nigerian Muslims.
jafar you sound very annoyed and I thought posting this wasn't bad at all. This article explains yes there are terrorist doing awful things in the name of Allah but that isn't all of the Muslims beliefs , I truly felt this was a article to help you explain what you where saying and also to help me explain how I feel we need to fix it :dunno:
jafar00
10-02-2013, 07:17 AM
jafar you sound very annoyed and I thought posting this wasn't bad at all. This article explains yes there are terrorist doing awful things in the name of Allah but that isn't all of the Muslims beliefs , I truly felt this was a article to help you explain what you where saying and also to help me explain how I feel we need to fix it :dunno:
You do spend an inordinate amount of time scouring the internet for blog posts and opinion pieces that present Islam and Arabs in the worst light possible. I could be mistaken for thinking you work for Mossad and/or Al Qaeda ;)
Anyway....
One verse alone (actually more than one but let's keep it simple) condemns both Boko Haram and the nutcases that killed in Kenya.
وَمَن يَقْتُلْ مُؤْمِنًا مُّتَعَمِّدًا فَجَزَاؤُهُ جَهَنَّمُ خَالِدًا فِيهَا وَغَضِبَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَلَعَنَهُ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُ عَذَابًا عَظِيمًا [٤:٩٣
Any one who kills a believer intentionally will be cast into Hell to abide there for ever, and suffer God's anger and damnation. For him a greater punishment awaits. (4:93)
You do spend an inordinate amount of time scouring the internet for blog posts and opinion pieces that present Islam and Arabs in the worst light possible. I could be mistaken for thinking you work for Mossad and/or Al Qaeda ;)
Anyway....
One verse alone (actually more than one but let's keep it simple) condemns both Boko Haram and the nutcases that killed in Kenya.
وَمَن يَقْتُلْ مُؤْمِنًا مُّتَعَمِّدًا فَجَزَاؤُهُ جَهَنَّمُ خَالِدًا فِيهَا وَغَضِبَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَلَعَنَهُ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُ عَذَابًا عَظِيمًا [٤:٩٣
Any one who kills a believer intentionally will be cast into Hell to abide there for ever, and suffer God's anger and damnation. For him a greater punishment awaits. (4:93)
Not at all jafar I open the news and there it is, it isn't my fault that almost daily someone is killing in the name of Allah and as I said due to the fact of the new Circle on board here I thought long and hard before posting this ( even though it is news ) but as I read through it I thought this is exactly what jafar is saying so basically you and gabby would just like to make believe these murders and atrocities never happen well get in the real world they happen daily and people deserve to know about it, as for me thinking long and hard not to upset the Houlier than thou circle that has past after this
jafar00
10-02-2013, 02:55 PM
Not at all jafar I open the news and there it is, it isn't my fault that almost daily someone is killing in the name of Allah and as I said due to the fact of the new Circle on board here I thought long and hard before posting this ( even though it is news ) but as I read through it I thought this is exactly what jafar is saying so basically you and gabby would just like to make believe these murders and atrocities never happen well get in the real world they happen daily and people deserve to know about it, as for me thinking long and hard not to upset the Houlier than thou circle that has past after this
When you post other news without trying to use it to denigrate Islam, I may believe you.
stevecanuck
10-02-2013, 03:35 PM
Anyway....
One verse alone (actually more than one but let's keep it simple) condemns both Boko Haram and the nutcases that killed in Kenya.
وَمَن يَقْتُلْ مُؤْمِنًا مُّتَعَمِّدًا فَجَزَاؤُهُ جَهَنَّمُ خَالِدًا فِيهَا وَغَضِبَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَلَعَنَهُ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُ عَذَابًا عَظِيمًا [٤:٩٣
Any one who kills a believer intentionally will be cast into Hell to abide there for ever, and suffer God's anger and damnation. For him a greater punishment awaits. (4:93)
Yes, the Qur'an tells Muslims not to kill each other. So, how do they get around that and actually slaughter each other by the thousands? Easy, they just label the others as hypocrites and/or apostates, and open fire. What a lovely religion.
stevecanuck
10-02-2013, 03:38 PM
Jafar, you ignored this post: "The answer is very simply, "NO". Mohamed taught and made war. It's a matter of the historical record and can't be denied." Can I assume you agree with my comment?
jafar00
10-02-2013, 03:58 PM
Yes, the Qur'an tells Muslims not to kill each other. So, how do they get around that and actually slaughter each other by the thousands? Easy, they just label the others as hypocrites and/or apostates, and open fire. What a lovely religion.
They "get around" it by not following it.
Jafar, you ignored this post: "The answer is very simply, "NO". Mohamed taught and made war. It's a matter of the historical record and can't be denied." Can I assume you agree with my comment?
No.
Drummond
10-02-2013, 05:24 PM
They "get around" it by not following it.
Is that so ?
So MANY do so, then. Multiples of groups, in multiples of locations, in various parts of the world.
That, Jafar, is an awful lot of 'coincidences' !!
Not really credible -- is it, Jafar ?
By the way, how's your reading of the Hamas Charter coming along ? Do you like its insistence, IN THE NAME OF ISLAM, for the path of Jihad, and its rejection of peace agreements with Israel ?
If Islam 'is a religion of peace', and you yourself are loyal to that perception ... how come you give even the time of day to thugs such as Hamas, much less feel any predisposition towards giving them any outright support ???
jafar00
10-02-2013, 09:45 PM
Is that so ?
So MANY do so, then. Multiples of groups, in multiples of locations, in various parts of the world.
That, Jafar, is an awful lot of 'coincidences' !!
Not really credible -- is it, Jafar ?
Meh. There is the Qur'aan saying one thing, and criminals acting the opposite way. Islam means submission to God. If you are purposely ignoring the Qur'aan and acting contrary to it's teachings, you are no longer submitting to God and therefore no longer a Muslim (one who submits). Simple logic no?
Drummond
10-03-2013, 11:14 AM
Meh. There is the Qur'aan saying one thing, and criminals acting the opposite way. Islam means submission to God. If you are purposely ignoring the Qur'aan and acting contrary to it's teachings, you are no longer submitting to God and therefore no longer a Muslim (one who submits). Simple logic no?
.... which ignores the reality, Jafar ... and the reality is as I've described it, with terrorist group after terrorist group not only springing up, but persisting.
If those groups don't represent Islam, Jafar, then how do they convince their many converts that they DO ?
And why is it, Jafar, that you're STILL ducking the Hamas issue ?? You support them, yet you don't DIRECTLY criticise their terrorism, nor yet the stances taken in their Charter .. WHICH THEY ADVERTISE AS BEING THE ISLAMIC WAY.
If they're wrong about that, and if you wholeheartedly believe all you say, what's stopping you from abandoning all support for them ?
jafar00
10-03-2013, 02:58 PM
.... which ignores the reality, Jafar ... and the reality is as I've described it, with terrorist group after terrorist group not only springing up, but persisting.
If those groups don't represent Islam, Jafar, then how do they convince their many converts that they DO ?
Terrorism is politics. If you live in an unstable country, it is not too hard to convince some lesser educated cannon fodder that those of whom you consider your enemy killed their grandmothers or something.
As for their following Islam, it's black and white isn't it. You either are or you are not.
And why is it, Jafar, that you're STILL ducking the Hamas issue ?? You support them, yet you don't DIRECTLY criticise their terrorism, nor yet the stances taken in their Charter .. WHICH THEY ADVERTISE AS BEING THE ISLAMIC WAY.
If they're wrong about that, and if you wholeheartedly believe all you say, what's stopping you from abandoning all support for them ?
Perhaps I am sick of you stalking the issue in EVERY thread. I just don't care.
stevecanuck
10-13-2013, 11:16 AM
http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by stevecanuck http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=668205#post668205) Jafar, you ignored this post: "The answer is very simply, "NO". Mohamed taught and made war. It's a matter of the historical record and can't be denied." Can I assume you agree with my comment?
No. Are you denying that Mohamed made war?
stevecanuck
10-13-2013, 11:19 AM
Meh. There is the Qur'aan saying one thing, and criminals acting the opposite way. Islam means submission to God. If you are purposely ignoring the Qur'aan and acting contrary to it's teachings, you are no longer submitting to God and therefore no longer a Muslim (one who submits). Simple logic no?Let's just examine one thing at a time. Do you deny that the Qur'an and hadiths allow for keeping female prisoners of war as sex slaves?
Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
10-13-2013, 12:32 PM
You do spend an inordinate amount of time scouring the internet for blog posts and opinion pieces that present Islam and Arabs in the worst light possible. I am shocked, shocked I tell you . To read that you are complaining that too much --TRUTH-- is being presented! If it is true why complain? If it is lies then expose it as such. Simple, n'est-ce pas? --Tyr
Drummond
10-13-2013, 01:04 PM
Terrorism is politics. If you live in an unstable country, it is not too hard to convince some lesser educated cannon fodder that those of whom you consider your enemy killed their grandmothers or something.
As for their following Islam, it's black and white isn't it. You either are or you are not.
TERRORISM IS POLITICS ???
Was 9/11 'politics' ? Was 7/7 'politics' ??
And people are not 'cannon fodder', no matter WHAT their level of education may be !
Jafar, are you perhaps giving us an insight as to your true thinking ?
You go on to say that 'Islam, it's black and white isn't it'. Which is curious, because more typically, Muslims might argue (when trying to persuade us that Islam is 'a religion of peace') that there are different interpretations of Islam, some stricter than others. But to be fair to you, you say instead that terrorists defy Islam altogether.
You know .. it would help if Islamic apologists could get their stories straight ...
No, Jafar. Terrorism is not politics. Terrorism is savagery. Terrorism is criminality. That's the truth of it.
Perhaps I am sick of you stalking the issue in EVERY thread. I just don't care.
IS it every thread ? I hadn't noticed. I must've been doing a better job of bringing up the issue than I'd realised - which is all to the good.
And I note that you say you 'just don't care'. So ... Hamas's terrorism, you DON'T care about, Hamas claiming to be Islamic AND being terrorists isn't an issue you care about .. but, terrorism from other groups, you do ?
How come ? Does Hamas offer 'a better class of terrorism', or something ?
OR - is it just that you absolutely refuse to acknowledge and face the fact that, in supporting Hamas, you ARE supporting terrorists, and that this flies in the face of any and all other objections you raise against other terrorism ?
You're refusing to be consistent on the issue of terrorism. What does that tell us ?
jafar00
10-13-2013, 03:23 PM
Are you denying that Mohamed made war?
Yes. He did however defend himself as is allowed in the Qur'aan.
Let's just examine one thing at a time. Do you deny that the Qur'an and hadiths allow for keeping female prisoners of war as sex slaves?
You misunderstand the concept. 1400 years ago, widows didn't get welfare. Taking them under your wing and looking after them after their husband died in battle was considered the noble thing to do. The concept of "slaves" was also changed under Islam. Instead of forced labour, "slaves" were to be treated like a member of the family and if possible, freed. The system of Zakat (charity) was used to buy the freedom of some slaves. One example of purchasing a slave's freedom was one of Mohamed's (saw) companions, Bilal who is credited with making the first call to prayer. His master used to torture him because of his faith and his refusing to worship the false idols of Mecca. One day while he was tied down in the sun being tortured with a boulder on his chest, Abu Bakr came along and purchased him for 100 dinar, then he was freed.
TERRORISM IS POLITICS ???
Was 9/11 'politics' ? Was 7/7 'politics' ??
Yes and Yes. You should read a dictionary sometime :p
ter·ror·ism [ter-uh-riz-uhhttp://static.sfdict.com/dictstatic/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pnghttp://static.sfdict.com/dictstatic/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngm] Show IPA
noun1.the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2.the state of fear (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fear) and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorize).
3.a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
DragonStryk72
10-13-2013, 05:15 PM
Like this article states not all Muslims are our enemy but the numbers that are are growing at a rapid rate and until the peaceful Muslims stand up and take back there Peaceful image it will continue to make them all look bad .
http://eaglerising.com/2021/islam-religion-peace/
It certainly can be, but Islam needs their version of the Reformation to get them there. This does, yes, involve peaceful Muslims, such as Jafar, standing up against these crimes, and they have to be willing to admit the pervasiveness of the problem, much as Martin Luther did when he called out the Church.
Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
10-13-2013, 05:32 PM
It certainly can be, but Islam needs their version of the Reformation to get them there. This does, yes, involve peaceful Muslims, such as Jafar, standing up against these crimes, and they have to be willing to admit the pervasiveness of the problem, much as Martin Luther did when he called out the Church. I've mentioned before that Christianity had it's Reformation but Islam is designed to never allow a Reformation because it's followers are instructed to kill any such apostates/enemies of Allah. And they do just that with absolute glee and abandon! -Tyr
jafar00
10-13-2013, 07:54 PM
I've mentioned before that Christianity had it's Reformation but Islam is designed to never allow a Reformation because it's followers are instructed to kill any such apostates/enemies of Allah. And they do just that with absolute glee and abandon! -Tyr
No, we are not instructed to kill any apostates. There is no worldly punishment for apostasy in Islamic law.
stevecanuck
10-14-2013, 10:53 AM
No, we are not instructed to kill any apostates. There is no worldly punishment for apostasy in Islamic law.Of all Jafar's lies and deflections, this one is probably the easiest to debunk. Forget for the moment that they've been killing apostates in the Arabian Peninsula since the days of Mohamed, and that currently apostates are given 3 days to return to Islam before being executed, the hadiths prescribe the death penalty as clearly as can be. Jafar: Proving my signature line with every post.
stevecanuck
10-14-2013, 11:03 AM
Yes. He did however defend himself as is allowed in the Qur'aan.Or maybe this one is the easiest to debunk. So many lies, so many choices. First, Mohamed was not chased out of Mecca in fear for his life as Muslims like to say. He simply decided to leave. He had spent 13 years there trying in vain to attract a following. In all that time he managed to gather only a handful, and his ministry had come to a grinding halt. He and his few followers were never physically abused in the entire 13 years. He did have some followers who he had sent to Medina (then called Yathrib), and even without Mohamed being there, were having more luck recruiting than Mohamed was having in Mecca, so he decided to relocate. Never was he pursued or threatened. Once in Medina he began raiding Meccan caravans and generally making war against them minus ANY self-defense imperative. Every single post by Jafar is a big fat lie.
stevecanuck
10-14-2013, 11:12 AM
http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by stevecanuck http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=669553#post669553) Let's just examine one thing at a time. Do you deny that the Qur'an and hadiths allow for keeping female prisoners of war as sex slaves?
You misunderstand the concept. 1400 years ago, widows didn't get welfare. Taking them under your wing and looking after them after their husband died in battle was considered the noble thing to do. The concept of "slaves" was also changed under Islam. Instead of forced labour, "slaves" were to be treated like a member of the family and if possible, freed. The system of Zakat (charity) was used to buy the freedom of some slaves. One example of purchasing a slave's freedom was one of Mohamed's (saw) companions, Bilal who is credited with making the first call to prayer. His master used to torture him because of his faith and his refusing to worship the false idols of Mecca. One day while he was tied down in the sun being tortured with a boulder on his chest, Abu Bakr came along and purchased him for 100 dinar, then he was freed.
I suppose if no outright lie is available, the next best thing is to purposely miss the point and answer in a non-sequitur. Of course I was talking about women from tribes who were attacked and defeated, not the widows of Mohamed's raiders. The men were frequently put to the sword, and the women and children enslaved or sold. The youngest and most attractive girls and women were kept as sex slaves. Verses 70:29 and 30, in describing men who will be favoured by God, list, "those who guard their chastity, except for their wives and the captives whom their right hands possess". This clearly gives Muslim men divine permission to rape their slaves/captives of war, and is confirmed by the following hadith: Bukhari, Volume: 7, Book Number: 62, Hadith Number: 137, Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's Apostle about it and he said, "Do you really do that, repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection." (In other words, why restrict yourself to coitus interruptus when God has already ordained whether the rape victim will become pregnant?)
Steve, out of curiosity, what is your relationship to Islam? Are you a former member of the faith? Just curious as you 'seem' to 'know' so much about it.
jimnyc
10-14-2013, 12:02 PM
Meh. There is the Qur'aan saying one thing, and criminals acting the opposite way. Islam means submission to God. If you are purposely ignoring the Qur'aan and acting contrary to it's teachings, you are no longer submitting to God and therefore no longer a Muslim (one who submits). Simple logic no?
No, we are not instructed to kill any apostates. There is no worldly punishment for apostasy in Islamic law.
Replying in regards to both.
I agree with you, to the extent that I have replied many times before. I agree that there are radicals like this who pervert much of what Islam stands for and use it for all the wrong reasons; abuse, violence, terrorism... Perhaps similarly with apostates. Sure, there may be no worldly punishment, but there are still many places who DO kill for leaving the faith, and they have their own little flavor of Sharia going on apparently. When I showed you these places in the past, you stated it was not Islam and they were wrong.
So anyway, it appears that we agree that so many of these actions are wrong and despicable. We agree for the most part that these people are perverting what is in the Quran and in other Islamic teachings. Perhaps they are simply not Muslims as you say, since they are not properly following the Quran or other teachings.
But the real problem is with the bad acts being committed, not that they are perverting the religion or that they aren't real Muslims. So if the acts are the bad parts - WHO is standing up to stop these wrongs in the Islamic countries? I understand it's a widespread and massive problem - but I really don't see a whole lot being done by Islamic governments, armies or police. In fact, I would go as far as to say that I can find more violence and terrorism being reported daily than I can arrests and such of these people.
Someone, somewhere, needs to stand up and say "ENOUGH OF THE VIOLENCE, enough of the abuse and terrorism in our own countries, this has got to stop"
But who? Seriously, WHO do you think it is that needs to say this, act on this? I think it's the responsibility of the governments of the land these things transpire in. From the police there, from their armies if necessary. And all of the excuses in the world won't change the reality - which is that these things aren't being shut down properly by the proper people.
jimnyc
10-14-2013, 12:06 PM
Steve, out of curiosity, what is your relationship to Islam? Are you a former member of the faith? Just curious as you 'seem' to 'know' so much about it.
I can say from memory that I know he has at the very least studied Islam, speaks Arabic and certainly knows a LOT more than the average Joe. But you seem to be questioning his knowledge, based on the quotes around seem and know. I'm not sure myself that ones background changes whether or not what they write is correct or incorrect. Is there something he wrote specifically that you want to question/debate?
jafar00
10-14-2013, 02:36 PM
Steve, out of curiosity, what is your relationship to Islam? Are you a former member of the faith? Just curious as you 'seem' to 'know' so much about it.
He knows enough to twist things to his agenda. Taliban style....
Someone, somewhere, needs to stand up and say "ENOUGH OF THE VIOLENCE, enough of the abuse and terrorism in our own countries, this has got to stop"
But who? Seriously, WHO do you think it is that needs to say this, act on this? I think it's the responsibility of the governments of the land these things transpire in. From the police there, from their armies if necessary. And all of the excuses in the world won't change the reality - which is that these things aren't being shut down properly by the proper people.
Would you have the courage to stand up to a Taliban with a gun pointed at your head or would you do exactly what he said? People are living in fear of their lives and families in Taliban controlled areas.
stevecanuck
10-14-2013, 03:07 PM
Steve, out of curiosity, what is your relationship to Islam? Are you a former member of the faith? Just curious as you 'seem' to 'know' so much about it. I 'seem' to 'know'? Your prejudice is showing with the quote marks. But, to answer your 'question', I lived in Egypt for 7 years, I've read the Qur'an very thoroughly (I can read Arabic, but I have a fairly limited vocabulary), I've read several books on Islam and Islamic history. I probably know more about it than 99.9% of the general public. What do you 'know' about it?
I 'seem' to 'know'? Your prejudice is showing with the quote marks. But, to answer your 'question', I lived in Egypt for 7 years, I've read the Qur'an very thoroughly (I can read Arabic, but I have a fairly limited vocabulary), I've read several books on Islam and Islamic history. I probably know more about it than 99.9% of the general public. What do you 'know' about it?
So you lived for a few years where it was a majority religion, and you have kinda read the holy book (one can't read things completely with a limited vocabulary can they?). There are many books about Islam and it's history, some biased one way, some biased the other. Thanks for answering my question, very enlightening.
KitchenKitten99
10-14-2013, 03:19 PM
All I will say is this:
Review history books on how the Native Americans were almost all wiped out when the white settlers and the US government took over. Due to transportation and communication restrictions, it happened slowly.
Now with the modern world we have, just look how in the past 20 years, especially the most recent 10, the influx of the Muslim population in areas where none existed before. Same with illegal immigrants.
They know they cannot overtake by force. They know they have to infest and infiltrate from within.
History is repeating itself. This time, the US Citizens are the 'Native Americans' (technically, we are), and Muslims are now the 'white man'.
FYI--they read our history books too. And are using the 'race' card to their advantage. Thanks, Liberals. Thanks a lot, fucktards!
jimnyc
10-14-2013, 03:20 PM
So you lived for a few years where it was a majority religion, and you have kinda read the holy book (one can't read things completely with a limited vocabulary can they?). There are many books about Islam and it's history, some biased one way, some biased the other. Thanks for answering my question, very enlightening.
Rather than play games and make it personal - how about you prove something wrong that you think he has posted? You seem to want to write about HOW he read the Quran, comment on vocabulary and such. But rather than worry about the history or qualifications of another, why not just stick to the point, and if you disagree with him, offer counter points as your proof or opinion? Asking this of him, and then jumping on his answer as if his qualifications are not good enough, shows me at least that you would rather attack the messenger for whatever reason since you can't appropriately debate what he actually wrote.
jimnyc
10-14-2013, 03:22 PM
Would you have the courage to stand up to a Taliban with a gun pointed at your head or would you do exactly what he said? People are living in fear of their lives and families in Taliban controlled areas.
WHat I spoke of takes place in a LOT more than Taliban controlled areas. Are you saying that the Islamic countries where these many problems exist CAN'T do anything to combat these actions, that every country has similar groups to the Taliban that are more in control than the actual governments, police, armies?
Drummond
10-14-2013, 03:24 PM
Yes and Yes. You should read a dictionary sometime :p
ter·ror·ism
[ter-uh-riz-uhhttp://static.sfdict.com/dictstatic/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pnghttp://static.sfdict.com/dictstatic/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngm] Show IPA
noun1.the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2.the state of fear (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fear) and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorize).
3.a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
Even reading this definition (you should quote your sources, by the way .. this one's identified as being legitimately from 'Dictionary.com') ... I'm not convinced that you have a case.
Let's say someone steals for food. Does the act of stealing equate to 'hunger', or is it nothing more than food-acquisition ? OR, is it a criminal act undertaken for an outcome ?
Ditto for someone who robs someone and takes their wallet, say. Does the act of stealing equate to nothing more than eradication of impoverishment ? OR, is it a criminal act undertaken for an outcome ?
Criminal acts don't cease to be EXACTLY THAT because you assign purpose to them, Jafar.
An act of terrorism is an act of criminality, Jafar. It doesn't cease to be that because there MAY be a political goal in mind. A criminal act, IS A CRIMINAL ACT.
9/11 WAS AN ACT OF MASS MURDER. OF SAVAGERY.
7/7 WAS AN ACT OF MASS MURDER. OF SAVAGERY.
Neither reality becomes any less discernible as what it is, because some sense of political purpose may be involved.
So please, Jafar, stop trying to sanitise the worst excesses Islam has to offer, by making it synonymous with something which can be viewed as 'respectable'. Murders, savageries, such as 9/11 and 7/7 were especially disgusting criminal acts, which have no place AT ALL in a civilised world.
... which reminds me. How's your support for Hamas coming along, Jafar ?
Rather than play games and make it personal
That's what you are doing when you question my posts (yet don't do it to others). If you don't like what I post, please put me on ignore.
jimnyc
10-14-2013, 03:33 PM
That's what you are doing when you question my posts (yet don't do it to others). If you don't like what I post, please put me on ignore.
I didn't see anyone else in this thread (or any others today for that fact) where another member was asking another for their qualifications on a subject). Can you show me where I have missed this?
And no, I won't put you on ignore. I'll continue to call you out when you're an asshole, and if you don't like it, simply don't act like an asshole.
I further notice that AGAIN you clip out the portion of a post that you CANNOT answer. WHY do you become this supposed asshole, and refuse to actually engage someone in normal debate, perhaps put something out there that proves what they wrote wrong? Wouldn't it make more sense to do that, instead of being this asshole person?
I didn't see anyone else in this thread (or any others today for that fact) where another member was asking another for their qualifications on a subject). Can you show me where I have missed this?
Nice diversionary tactics.
And no, I won't put you on ignore. I'll continue to call you out when you're an asshole, and if you don't like it, simply don't act like an asshole.
But that's what you want others to do. Do as you say, not as you do?
I further notice that AGAIN you clip out the portion of a post that you CANNOT answer. WHY do you become this supposed asshole, and refuse to actually engage someone in normal debate, perhaps put something out there that proves what they wrote wrong? Wouldn't it make more sense to do that, instead of being this asshole person?
I clip the quote so as to show the only part I see as relevant. But your above bit is hysterically funny, all things considered. What will be even more funny is who gives you big clapping hands and likes your post.
jimnyc
10-14-2013, 03:45 PM
Arbo, please go to another thread, and when you get there, please try and stick to topics, post what you agree or disagree with, hopefully with citations - and please worry less about the qualifications of other members. Very rarely will you find members here with actual qualifications for what they post about. Nonetheless, NO ONE needs qualifications in order to post here. We know you have an issue with those who post against Islam. You are more than welcome to refute what they write, or ignore them. But starting crap with every one of them is silly.
stevecanuck
10-14-2013, 04:11 PM
So you lived for a few years where it was a majority religion, and you have kinda read the holy book (one can't read things completely with a limited vocabulary can they?). There are many books about Islam and it's history, some biased one way, some biased the other. Thanks for answering my question, very enlightening.You have clearly decided on a side here without really knowing a damned thing. There is no "kinda" about the study I've done. One can read an English translation of the Qur'an and get the message. There's no magic in the translation. Your attempt to trivialize my knowledge is juvenile at best. Why don't you try practicing some balance by questioning Jafar's posts for a change?
stevecanuck
10-14-2013, 04:18 PM
Arbo, I made 3 responses to Jafar's posts today on the previous page. Did you even read them? Is there anything I said that doesn't ring true to you? If so, why not actually make an argument-based comment for once. That would make a nice change. If shooting the messenger is the best you can do, you're about to be ignored.
Kathianne
10-14-2013, 05:10 PM
SteveC, if I read Jim's last post between the lines correctly, Arbo may not be able to respond on this thread. :cool:
Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
10-14-2013, 06:05 PM
SteveC, if I read Jim's last post between the lines correctly, Arbo may not be able to respond on this thread. :cool: I read the same as you on that KAT. And I think Jim is dead on about it too. I can not ever remember question any members here on their qualifications to post on a given subject! Would be an awful small board if expertise in the subject field was required to post one's opinion on a topic! Actually only a very select few here try to play that tactic when facing truth that they have no means to refute! Playing that game as a repeated pattern is as stupid and childish as one can be in my opinion. --Tyr
Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
10-14-2013, 06:06 PM
Rather than play games and make it personal - how about you prove something wrong that you think he has posted? You seem to want to write about HOW he read the Quran, comment on vocabulary and such. But rather than worry about the history or qualifications of another, why not just stick to the point, and if you disagree with him, offer counter points as your proof or opinion? Asking this of him, and then jumping on his answer as if his qualifications are not good enough, shows me at least that you would rather attack the messenger for whatever reason since you can't appropriately debate what he actually wrote. Bravo.. :beer:--Tyr
You cannot give Reputation to the same post twice.
fj1200
10-14-2013, 10:52 PM
Even reading this definition (you should quote your sources, by the way .. this one's identified as being legitimately from 'Dictionary.com') ... I'm not convinced that you have a case.
... snip ...
... which reminds me. How's your support for Hamas coming along, Jafar ?
That was a wonderful post... except for not addressing the point that jafar raised. So terrorists are just criminals now? That seems contrary to your previous position on the matter.
Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
10-14-2013, 11:41 PM
That was a wonderful post... except for not addressing the point that jafar raised. So terrorists are just criminals now? That seems contrary to your previous position on the matter. Crapola fj, he has in the last 6 months repeatedly addressed Jafar's points but most often was ignored in the process. -Tyr
fj1200
10-14-2013, 11:45 PM
Crapola fj, he has in the last 6 months repeatedly addressed Jafar's points but most often was ignored in the process. -Tyr
Pardon, I was referring to a specific post, not the past 6 months.
Drummond
10-15-2013, 03:04 PM
That was a wonderful post...
Yes, wasn't it !! We're in agreement !
.... except for not addressing the point that jafar raised. So terrorists are just criminals now? That seems contrary to your previous position on the matter.
.... and you were doing so well .... being you, you just had to spoil the moment ...:rolleyes:
Actually, I did address the point. The point involved a discussion not specifically about terrorists, but about terrorism, the action. Jafar took the line that terrorist attacks were 'politics'. I disagreed, for the reason(s) I gave.
I wasn't talking about terrorists, the creatures. I was talking about terrorism, and what the act of terrorism was.
Is this clear to you now ?
And I was correct. Terrorism is criminal ... unless, of course, you want to claim that terrorism is not a crime ?? Was 9/11 lawful ???
If you like, I will - once more - expand the discussion to include terrorists, the creature, not terrorism, the criminal act. Your choice.
fj1200
10-15-2013, 04:13 PM
Yes, wasn't it !! We're in agreement !
You, being you of course, see only what you want to see.
.... and you were doing so well .... being you, you just had to spoil the moment ...:rolleyes:
Actually, I did address the point. The point involved a discussion not specifically about terrorists, but about terrorism, the action. Jafar took the line that terrorist attacks were 'politics'. I disagreed, for the reason(s) I gave.
I wasn't talking about terrorists, the creatures. I was talking about terrorism, and what the act of terrorism was.
Is this clear to you now ?
And I was correct. Terrorism is criminal ... unless, of course, you want to claim that terrorism is not a crime ?? Was 9/11 lawful ???
If you like, I will - once more - expand the discussion to include terrorists, the creature, not terrorism, the criminal act. Your choice.
And no, you didn't really address it. You dismissed it in error and then went about your merry way. Which means I shouldn't be surprised when you didn't really address my point/query either. Your opposition to Islam seems to be your opinion of the war-like means by which they are spreading their religion and views. So the point of my question was are you going to acknowledge it for what it is or are you going to oppose Jafar just for the sake of opposing Jafar?
Now if you want to go ahead and lose another debate about terrorists then I have no problem but you will again be seen for what you are.
stevecanuck
10-15-2013, 04:22 PM
Bump for Jafar. I made 3 posts countering your points on page 2, and you seem to be pretending that they don't exist. Running away again?
jafar00
10-15-2013, 11:19 PM
They know they cannot overtake by force. They know they have to infest and infiltrate from within.
So, we are an infestation now? I am human, not an insect!
WHat I spoke of takes place in a LOT more than Taliban controlled areas. Are you saying that the Islamic countries where these many problems exist CAN'T do anything to combat these actions, that every country has similar groups to the Taliban that are more in control than the actual governments, police, armies?
History shows that anyone who opposes tinpot dictators either ends up victorious, or more likely, DEAD.
Even reading this definition (you should quote your sources, by the way .. this one's identified as being legitimately from 'Dictionary.com') ... I'm not convinced that you have a case.
Let's say someone steals for food. Does the act of stealing equate to 'hunger', or is it nothing more than food-acquisition ? OR, is it a criminal act undertaken for an outcome ?
Ditto for someone who robs someone and takes their wallet, say. Does the act of stealing equate to nothing more than eradication of impoverishment ? OR, is it a criminal act undertaken for an outcome ?
Criminal acts don't cease to be EXACTLY THAT because you assign purpose to them, Jafar.
An act of terrorism is an act of criminality, Jafar. It doesn't cease to be that because there MAY be a political goal in mind. A criminal act, IS A CRIMINAL ACT.
9/11 WAS AN ACT OF MASS MURDER. OF SAVAGERY.
7/7 WAS AN ACT OF MASS MURDER. OF SAVAGERY.
Neither reality becomes any less discernible as what it is, because some sense of political purpose may be involved.
So please, Jafar, stop trying to sanitise the worst excesses Islam has to offer, by making it synonymous with something which can be viewed as 'respectable'. Murders, savageries, such as 9/11 and 7/7 were especially disgusting criminal acts, which have no place AT ALL in a civilised world.
... which reminds me. How's your support for Hamas coming along, Jafar ?
I agree with you. Terrorism is criminal. It doesn't change the fact that it is done for political purposes. Islam condemns terrorism so I would stop trying to call it an Islamic thing. You are coming across a bit foolish.
Of all Jafar's lies and deflections, this one is probably the easiest to debunk. Forget for the moment that they've been killing apostates in the Arabian Peninsula since the days of Mohamed, and that currently apostates are given 3 days to return to Islam before being executed, the hadiths prescribe the death penalty as clearly as can be. Jafar: Proving my signature line with every post.
There may be a few misguided leaders doing so, but there is no prescribed worldly punishment for apostasy in Islam. Not in Hadiths. Not in the Qur'aan. As for your claim that they are in Hadiths, not one of them was put to death for apostasy. They were put to death for high treason. Apostasy just usually accompanied the treason.
Believe it or not, the Qur'aan doesn't agree with your assessment that the penalty for Apostasy in Sharia is death. Even if you ignore history and bring cherry picked, out of context and mis-quoted Hadiths to support your claims, the Qur'aan supersedes all of that. At the most basic level of Hadith sciences if the Hadith contradicts the Qur'aan, it cannot be used to make any law. The 2 most commonly used Hadith quotes are in fact ahad or weak Hadiths with no chain of narrators.
In any case, the verses below should suffice in cancelling out any Hadith you can produce.
Say: (It is) the truth from the Lord of you (all). Then whosoever will, let him believe, and whosoever will, let him disbelieve. Lo! We have prepared for disbelievers Fire. Its tent encloseth them. If they ask for showers, they will be showered with water like to molten lead which burneth the faces. Calamitous the drink and ill the resting-place! (18:29)
There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. (2:256)
But whoso is averse and disbelieveth, Allah will punish him with direst punishment. (22:23-24)
Lo! We have revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture for mankind with truth. Then whosoever goeth right it is for his soul, and whosoever strayeth, strayeth only to its hurt. And thou art not a warder over them.(39:41)
These are just some verses from the Qur'aan that support me. You can read it front to back and you will not find a single verse to support a worldly punishment for apostasy.
Or maybe this one is the easiest to debunk. So many lies, so many choices. First, Mohamed was not chased out of Mecca in fear for his life as Muslims like to say. He simply decided to leave. He had spent 13 years there trying in vain to attract a following. In all that time he managed to gather only a handful, and his ministry had come to a grinding halt. He and his few followers were never physically abused in the entire 13 years. He did have some followers who he had sent to Medina (then called Yathrib), and even without Mohamed being there, were having more luck recruiting than Mohamed was having in Mecca, so he decided to relocate. Never was he pursued or threatened. Once in Medina he began raiding Meccan caravans and generally making war against them minus ANY self-defense imperative. Every single post by Jafar is a big fat lie.
There was persecution in Mecca before hijira. It was one of the reasons he and his followers left for Medina. Stop trying to rewrite history.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMN2FtwIPOE#t=1:01:48
Even the Jews know this.
In 622, Muhammad left Mecca for an oasis then known as Yathrib. This trip became known as the hejira, the flight from persecution in Mecca.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/Muhammad.html
I suppose if no outright lie is available, the next best thing is to purposely miss the point and answer in a non-sequitur. Of course I was talking about women from tribes who were attacked and defeated, not the widows of Mohamed's raiders. The men were frequently put to the sword, and the women and children enslaved or sold. The youngest and most attractive girls and women were kept as sex slaves. Verses 70:29 and 30, in describing men who will be favoured by God, list, "those who guard their chastity, except for their wives and the captives whom their right hands possess". This clearly gives Muslim men divine permission to rape their slaves/captives of war, and is confirmed by the following hadith: Bukhari, Volume: 7, Book Number: 62, Hadith Number: 137, Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's Apostle about it and he said, "Do you really do that, repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection." (In other words, why restrict yourself to coitus interruptus when God has already ordained whether the rape victim will become pregnant?)
You should know better than to randomly quote a Hadith that appears to support your idea.
In any case, I can just quote the Qur'aan which specifically voids your claim of raping slaves.
Let those who find not the wherewithal for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allah gives them means out of His grace. And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if ye know any good in them: yea, give them something yourselves out of the means which Allah has given to you. But force not your maids to prostitution when they desire chastity, in order that ye may make a gain in the goods of this life. But if anyone compels them, yet, after such compulsion, is Allah, Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to them) (24:33)
As was the custom in warfare 14 centuries ago, women were often raped and left alone to fend for themselves. It was a custom from long before Islam came along. Islam brought limits to what people did where there were no limits. Before Islam, the Arabs could war and rape and pillage all they liked. This verse like others established a limit. ie. NO rape!
Islam also encourages the freeing of slaves. For example from the verse above..
And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if ye know any good in them: yea, give them something yourselves out of the means which Allah has given to you.
Kathianne
10-15-2013, 11:31 PM
So, we are an infestation now? I am human, not an insect!
History shows that anyone who opposes tinpot dictators either ends up victorious, or more likely, DEAD.
I agree with you. Terrorism is criminal. It doesn't change the fact that it is done for political purposes. Islam condemns terrorism so I would stop trying to call it an Islamic thing. You are coming across a bit foolish.
Though it was you bringing up 'political purposes,' why? Perhaps not looking quite so stupid.
There may be a few misguided leaders doing so, but there is no prescribed worldly punishment for apostasy in Islam. Not in Hadiths. Not in the Qur'aan. As for your claim that they are in Hadiths, not one of them was put to death for apostasy. They were put to death for high treason. Apostasy just usually accompanied the treason.
There are without a doubt misguided leaders, there always are.
Believe it or not, the Qur'aan doesn't agree with your assessment that the penalty for Apostasy in Sharia is death. Even if you ignore history and bring cherry picked, out of context and mis-quoted Hadiths to support your claims, the Qur'aan supersedes all of that. At the most basic level of Hadith sciences if the Hadith contradicts the Qur'aan, it cannot be used to make any law. The 2 most commonly used Hadith quotes are in fact ahad or weak Hadiths with no chain of narrators.
And yet, there are those that claim mastery of these studies that disagree with you. Not for a moment do I think you believe other than what you claim, some of which appears contradictory, but we'll chalk that up to religious texts and empathy for the down trodden.
In any case, the verses below should suffice in cancelling out any Hadith you can produce.
Say: (It is) the truth from the Lord of you (all). Then whosoever will, let him believe, and whosoever will, let him disbelieve. Lo! We have prepared for disbelievers Fire. Its tent encloseth them. If they ask for showers, they will be showered with water like to molten lead which burneth the faces. Calamitous the drink and ill the resting-place! (18:29)
There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. (2:256)
But whoso is averse and disbelieveth, Allah will punish him with direst punishment. (22:23-24)
Lo! We have revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture for mankind with truth. Then whosoever goeth right it is for his soul, and whosoever strayeth, strayeth only to its hurt. And thou art not a warder over them.(39:41)
These are just some verses from the Qur'aan that support me. You can read it front to back and you will not find a single verse to support a worldly punishment for apostasy.
There was persecution in Mecca before hijira. It was one of the reasons he and his followers left for Medina. Stop trying to rewrite history.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMN2FtwIPOE#t=1:01:48
Even the Jews know this. Pretty weird calling on Jews for appealing to authority.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/Muhammad.html
You should know better than to randomly quote a Hadith that appears to support your idea.
In any case, I can just quote the Qur'aan which specifically voids your claim of raping slaves.
Let those who find not the wherewithal for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allah gives them means out of His grace. And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if ye know any good in them: yea, give them something yourselves out of the means which Allah has given to you. But force not your maids to prostitution when they desire chastity, in order that ye may make a gain in the goods of this life. But if anyone compels them, yet, after such compulsion, is Allah, Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to them) (24:33)
As was the custom in warfare 14 centuries ago, women were often raped and left alone to fend for themselves. It was a custom from long before Islam came along. Islam brought limits to what people did where there were no limits. Before Islam, the Arabs could war and rape and pillage all they liked. This verse like others established a limit. ie. NO rape!
Islam also encourages the freeing of slaves. For example from the verse above..
And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if ye know any good in them: yea, give them something yourselves out of the means which Allah has given to you.
my comments in red.
jafar00
10-16-2013, 12:58 AM
Though it was you bringing up 'political purposes,' why? Perhaps not looking quite so stupid.
What I find looks stupid is the continual claim that terrorism is an Islamic act when Islam condemns it.
Opposite day was on January 25th! :)
And yet, there are those that claim mastery of these studies that disagree with you. Not for a moment do I think you believe other than what you claim, some of which appears contradictory, but we'll chalk that up to religious texts and empathy for the down trodden.
Like who? The Taliban? Al Qaeda? Iran?
I can get you the same as I said from Al Azhar, one of the highest regarded Islamic Authorities in the world.
Pretty weird calling on Jews for appealing to authority.
Just trying to show that basic history doesn't back up what stevecanuk claims.
stevecanuck
10-16-2013, 11:58 AM
You should know better than to randomly quote a Hadith that appears to support your idea. I'll have to find more time to take in all the replies since I last checked, but I did want to point out Jafar's disingenuous nature by highlighting the above. I made a claim that Muslims are allowed to rape their female captives, and I provided quotes from both the Qur'an and Hadiths. Both are very specific in what they say, and both bear directly on the issue, yet Jafar tries to toss them off by calling them "random" quotes. Only those who are losing an argument use such tactics.
Drummond
10-16-2013, 07:56 PM
I agree with you. Terrorism is criminal. It doesn't change the fact that it is done for political purposes. Islam condemns terrorism so I would stop trying to call it an Islamic thing. You are coming across a bit foolish.
Though your reply suggests a measure of agreement, it seems to me that you're now trying to shift some goalposts.
Yes, terrorism - the act - is criminal. Yes, those committing it most often assert that it's done for political purposes (.. though in truth, much of it has as its grounding a mixture of bloodlust, bigotry, outright race hatred, e.g hatred of Jews, from which savages think they're entitled to go on killing sprees, for no other reason than they WANT to).
But consider the path our discussion has recently taken. I asked you:
TERRORISM IS POLITICS ???
Was 9/11 'politics' ? Was 7/7 'politics' ??
You were clear in your reply, which was:
Yes and Yes. You should read a dictionary sometime :p
You then went on to quote, as my research showed, from 'Dictionary.com' to try and prove that contention.
You said that 9/11 and 7/7 WAS POLITICS ... you said it clearly.
Yet, now, you say that 'terrorism is criminal'.
.... So, is politics 'criminal' ... ??
My argument is that whatever the motivation for an act of criminality may be, the motivation does not define the act, nor for that matter excuse the nature of that act. I have given an argument in support of this. Frankly. I DON'T CARE if the likes of Al Qaeda say that what they're doing is for political purposes, this does NOT EXCUSE THEIR SAVAGERY.
Their savagery is criminal. Their excuse for it has no bearing on the heinous nature of what they do. The two are separate from each other, not mutually supportive of each other.
You say, now:
Islam condemns terrorism so I would stop trying to call it an Islamic thing. You are coming across a bit foolish.
If Islam condemns terrorism, explain the Hamas position. Their Charter makes it plain that THEIR promotion of Islam has its grounding in wars and terroristic acts of aggression, and indeed, they expect other Muslims to follow their example ! And .. YOU, as a SUPPORTER OF HAMAS, never show any wavering of support for Hamas, even despite what you say for Islam now.
Jafar, my question is surely obvious ...
Are you coming across as 'a bit foolish' .. ?
Drummond
10-16-2013, 08:14 PM
Your opposition to Islam seems to be your opinion of the war-like means by which they are spreading their religion and views. So the point of my question was are you going to acknowledge it for what it is or are you going to oppose Jafar just for the sake of opposing Jafar?
I oppose Jafar because I'm right to do so.
You talk of it being my 'opinion' that Islam has a war-like means of spreading religion and views. This is bizarre.
It is more than 'just my opinion' that Islamic terrorists commit acts of carnage on a daily basis ... there's a thread, here on DP, that does a splendid job of reporting on the REALITY of what they do. For your information, facts get reported there, not 'opinions'.
Now if you want to go ahead and lose another debate about terrorists then I have no problem but you will again be seen for what you are.
What I am, is grounded in reality, reality I tell the truth about. And I have yet to lose any debate about terrorists. That you might wish that I had is neither here nor there - I am not responsible for your fantasies.
Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
10-16-2013, 08:14 PM
I'll have to find more time to take in all the replies since I last checked, but I did want to point out Jafar's disingenuous nature by highlighting the above. I made a claim that Muslims are allowed to rape their female captives, and I provided quotes from both the Qur'an and Hadiths. Both are very specific in what they say, and both bear directly on the issue, yet Jafar tries to toss them off by calling them "random" quotes. Only those who are losing an argument use such tactics. As if random quotes are of no consequence even if that were the case. Random quotes from the Quran and hadiths no less! ASK ANY MUSLIM THEY WILL TELL YOU THE QURAN IS PERFECT --WITHOUT ANY ERRORS OR MISTAKES. Now we see where Jafar appears to admit both those evidence presented to refute his claim are of no consequence!! If that were true one must then ask how much more random and completely wrong stuff did Allah allow to infiltrate his holy word!??? --Tyr
fj1200
10-17-2013, 08:14 AM
I oppose Jafar because I'm right to do so.
You talk of it being my 'opinion' that Islam has a war-like means of spreading religion and views. This is bizarre.
It is more than 'just my opinion' that Islamic terrorists commit acts of carnage on a daily basis ... there's a thread, here on DP, that does a splendid job of reporting on the REALITY of what they do. For your information, facts get reported there, not 'opinions'.
Opposition for the sake of opposition makes you look weak but yes, you have many bizarre opinions. Your problem is that you lose credibility when your opinions conflict. Terrorism is committed by those looking to spread Islam in a war-like manner but yet you think that the actual terrorists are only criminals.
What I am, is grounded in reality, reality I tell the truth about. And I have yet to lose any debate about terrorists. That you might wish that I had is neither here nor there - I am not responsible for your fantasies.
Yeah, keep that dream alive. It lives well with the other delusions living in your imagination.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.