Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Better than your philosophical view of Islam that has no countries showing us what 'your' true waters are Kalam.
Show us the proof of those waters Kalam.
A U.S. Muslim group is planning a demonstration featuring controversial British imams who are advocating for the implementation of Sharia law in the United States. Rather than simply banning or protesting the event, it should not only be permitted, but become a prime-time television broadcast.
“The event is a rally, a call for the Sharia, a call for the Muslims to rise up and establish the Islamic state in America,” said Imam Anjem Choudary, one of the proposed speakers. The Islamic Thinker’s Society has scheduled the event for March 3 and organizers claim it will be held in front of the White House.
If the event does take place, American citizens will have the opportunity to see something that the media has largely kept hidden – that there is a segment of the American population that wants to subjugate our society under Islamic law. That is not to say that all American Muslims prefer Sharia by default – the group has to import speakers from Britain. The event itself may be appalling, but it provides Americans the perfect opportunity to learn the facts about Sharia and begin a national discussion as to whether Sharia is permissible in our society. If Americans can hear for themselves the words of those calling for an Islamic state in our country, rather than the secondhand soft-soaping we are likely to get from the New York Times or MSNBC, that will have a far greater impact.
The televised event should be accompanied by programming with an objective analysis of Sharia. This is crucial as Sharia’s advocates have a habit of telling their Muslim, Arabic-speaking audiences one thing and telling non-Muslim, English-speaking audiences another. This was clearly exposed when Anjem Choudary, the event’s main speaker, appeared on Sean Hannity’s show on Fox News earlier this month, declaring that under Sharia, women who are raped or commit adultery are not stoned to death. Hannity quickly pointed out that Choudary himself said that women who commit adultery should be stoned to death. Choudary then admitted that he supported Sharia’s penal code, including stonings.
Choudary said there are “misconceptions” about Sharia, but did nothing to clear any of them up. Therefore, instead of scheduling guests who repeat the same tired talking points, we need guests who will clear up these so-called misconceptions by explaining its background, what its crimes and punishments are, and especially whether it conflicts with our Constitution. What does Islam’s foundational texts say? Are women being stoned to death in Islamic countries? Does Sharia require that all women, Muslim or not, wear the Burqa? The truth is not what Choudary says, it’s what is written and what is occurring.
The reason Sharia is still a matter of debate in this country is because our media and politicians are the ones with the truth phobia
Today, the focus is on the speakers and organizations. Choudary’s organization, Islam4UK, was banned in 2010 under British counterterrorism laws. Islam4UK is a spinoff of the Islamist group al Muhajiroun, which is an offshoot of Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT), a group seeking to install a global Islamic caliphate. HT also seeks to destroy democracy and states that Sharia has supremacy over the Constitution in the United States. The Islamic Thinker’s Society is the U.S. counterpart of al Muhajiroun. Choudary has expressed support for Osama bin Laden, praised suicide bombers, such as the “magnificent 19” 9/11 hijackers, and has called for the execution of Pope Benedict XVII. Fellow speaker Abu Izzadeen was just released from a three-year sentence in British prison following a conviction for inciting terrorism.
Islamist rally calling for Sharia law in U.S. must go forward
It's a long way from his days as a medical student at Southampton University, where, friends say, he drank, indulged in casual sex, smoked cannabis and even took LSD. He called himself 'Andy' and was famed for his ability to drink a pint of cider in a few seconds.
One former acquaintance said: "At parties, like the rest of us, he was rarely without a joint. The morning after one party, I can remember him getting all the roaches (butts) from the spliffs we had smoked the night before out of the ashtrays, cutting them up and making a new one out of the leftovers.
"He would say he was a Muslim and was proud of his Pakistani heritage, but he did-n't seem to attend any of the mosques in Southampton, and I only knew of him having white girlfriends. He certainly shared a bed with them."
On one occasion, 'Andy' and a friend took LSD together. The friend said: "We took far too much and were hallucinating for 20 hours."
The unholy past of the Muslim cleric demanding the Pope's execution | News
At this time, we wouldn't elect a non-Christian as President. An atheist could not be elected as POTUS. Christians have enormous political power, especially in the GOP. It took Americans 232 years to elect a non-white president. We haven't elected a woman yet. I doubt we'd elect a gay or lesbian.
We don't care if we support dictators as long as it in our 'strategic interests'.
You didn't answer: why wouldn't we elect a non-Christian president? The GOP did not put the current President in the white house. Theoretically, without the GOP you could, but WHY wouldn't we?
If there are approximately 135 other countries in the world and they are all angry at your country, what chance does your country have? It is an ugly fact that you must try to get along with many of those nations. You cannot fight them all. A huge percentage of them have corrupt governments, how do you choose?
The Christians put Bush in the WH for eight years. Christians would NOT allow an atheist to be President. HW Bush said they shouldn't get to serve in the government OR EVEN BE US CITIZENS at all.
Islam is defined out of the following, known as the 5 pillars:
Shahada, the creed stating that "There is no God but God, and Muhammad is his messenger".
Salat, the prayer which is to be performed five times a day. This prayer is performed after strict rules: bending and uttering phrases from the Koran, as well as facing the direction towards the Ka'ba in Mecca.
Zakat, alms. This is a prescription which is practiced in very different ways in Islam today.
Sawm, fast during the month of Ramadan.
Hajj, pilgrimage to Mecca. This an obligation for all Muslims in good health and sufficiently good economic situation.
Within mainstream Islam, there are 3 levels: Islamism, which is the absolute variant, claiming that Islam is valid to all aspects of human life, promoting this to politics and world-wide missionary activities and willingly also violence and war; Conservatism, which just like Islamism, employs Islam for all aspects of life, but commonly within the family or the local community and it usually do not involve any violent acts; Moderates which are both intellectual and sectarian Muslims as well as Muslims with little attention and intensity to their religion.
At the next level there are numerous of orientations in terms of cult and myths. The mystical and the worship of mediators are among the most common. Mystical Islam is traditionally most active within Sunni Islam, and is summed up as Sufism, but spreads also into Shi'ism. The worship of mediators involves the worship of holy men and women in Sunni Islam, and the worship of both holy men and women as well as of the imams in Shi'i Islam. The worship of mediators may take the shape of idol worshipping or even polytheism, but in the larger cults this variant of Islam is interpreted as in total correspondence with the unique and single will of God.
Islam - LookLex Encyclopaedia
I read the whole site. The whole focus of it is to condemn the entire religion of Islam. You want to make moderate Muslims responsible for extremist Muslims and terrorists.
That like asking all Christians who are anti-abortion to be responsible for the nuts who murdered Dr Tillman, and who blow up clinics.
If Shariah Law needs to be reformed, it will be done by Muslims. In fact, there is such a movement. I wonder why no one who is bashing the religion has thought to reach out to the reformers?
I would guess your animosity for Muslims in general and distaste for valuing ANYTHING in the religion gets in the way.
Again, your Bias corrupts your Judgement and your Premise. Sharia is the Foundation of Islam. Sharia is the Issue, keep being an advocate for Totalitarian World Government, it suits you well. You have made your point many times over. I have made mine. There is little else to say on the matter, to each other.
My premise is that the ENTIRE RELIGION OF ISLAM IS NOT INHERENTLY FLAWED as you and your cohorts here claim. I don't buy it that ALL Muslims wish to conquer the world and establish Totalitarian World Government, anymore than I buy that Domionist Christians represent all of Christianity in their quest to make the US a Christian theocracy.
Paranoia suits you. It doesn't suit me.
Keep trying to shut up the opposition. It shows your own desire for totalitarianism on this thread. Only one view is acceptable here. YOURS. TOTAL ANTI-ISLAMIC PROPAGANDA OR NOTHING.
I have no problem with Muslims reforming their own religion. I have a problem with non-muslims forcing them to in their own nations.
Islam is defined out of the following, known as the 5 pillars:
Shahada, the creed stating that "There is no God but God, and Muhammad is his messenger".
Salat, the prayer which is to be performed five times a day. This prayer is performed after strict rules: bending and uttering phrases from the Koran, as well as facing the direction towards the Ka'ba in Mecca.
Zakat, alms. This is a prescription which is practiced in very different ways in Islam today.
Sawm, fast during the month of Ramadan.
Hajj, pilgrimage to Mecca. This an obligation for all Muslims in good health and sufficiently good economic situation.
Within mainstream Islam, there are 3 levels: Islamism, which is the absolute variant, claiming that Islam is valid to all aspects of human life, promoting this to politics and world-wide missionary activities and willingly also violence and war; Conservatism, which just like Islamism, employs Islam for all aspects of life, but commonly within the family or the local community and it usually do not involve any violent acts; Moderates which are both intellectual and sectarian Muslims as well as Muslims with little attention and intensity to their religion.
At the next level there are numerous of orientations in terms of cult and myths. The mystical and the worship of mediators are among the most common. Mystical Islam is traditionally most active within Sunni Islam, and is summed up as Sufism, but spreads also into Shi'ism. The worship of mediators involves the worship of holy men and women in Sunni Islam, and the worship of both holy men and women as well as of the imams in Shi'i Islam. The worship of mediators may take the shape of idol worshipping or even polytheism, but in the larger cults this variant of Islam is interpreted as in total correspondence with the unique and single will of God.
Islam - LookLex Encyclopaedia
This is what it says on paper (the talk). Where do you see the practice (the walk)? In predominately muslim nations, life conditions are some of the worst in the world. I know there are those that claim "poets and scholars" in islam, but today, those same "poets and scholars" are brutally murdered if they stay inside an islamic community.
You keep saying you abhor the violence. Sharia is responsible for the violence. It is an inseperable part of islam, therefore the entire religion is an abomination on all men.
The people that are raised in islam and concentrate on the spiritual and ignore the Sharia (or do it as little as possible for actual survival) can be great people. The religion they follow will continue to spread deceit, not truth. As such, any rational (scientific) people should reject the teachings of Sharia as false and denounce it.
Again, your Bias corrupts your Judgement and your Premise. Sharia is the Foundation of Islam. Sharia is the Issue, keep being an advocate for Totalitarian World Government, it suits you well. You have made your point many times over. I have made mine. There is little else to say on the matter, to each other.
My premise is that the ENTIRE RELIGION OF ISLAM IS NOT INHERENTLY FLAWED as you and your cohorts here claim. I don't buy it that ALL Muslims wish to conquer the world and establish Totalitarian World Government, anymore than I buy that Domionist Christians represent all of Christianity in their quest to make the US a Christian theocracy.
Paranoia suits you. It doesn't suit me.
Keep trying to shut up the opposition. It shows your own desire for totalitarianism on this thread. Only one view is acceptable here. YOURS. TOTAL ANTI-ISLAMIC PROPAGANDA OR NOTHING.
I have no problem with Muslims reforming their own religion. I have a problem with non-muslims forcing them to in their own nations.
"I have a problem with non-muslims forcing them to in their own nations" ....??? Who is forcing who here? Where are there examples of muslims being "forced" into their own nations? There are far more examples of muslims forcing peoples of other religions out of communities or out right murdering them because they do not follow islam.
Again, your outrage is sooooo selective.
Incorrect. 'Deception' and 'corruption' aren't valid courses of action for a leader in a Shari'i government unless a war is taking place and 'deception' takes the form of espionage or counterespionage used against an enemy state.You have to admit the irony here. Islam will only allow leaders that are muslim. The 'leader' must proclaim to be of the faith while deceiving his way to corrupt positions.
Nope. If you're incapable of doing anything beyond pulling nonsense out of your ass then let me know so I can stop wasting my time with you.At that point the 'leader' in the corrupt position must use 'mischief' and terror to maintain power.
Incorrect. The enforcement of Shari'ah has nothing to do with collective 'honor'. The enforcement of Shari'ah is not conditional. If a leader stands in violation of the Shari'ah, Shari'ah demands that he be brought to task.
Yeah... no.
I go to bed wondering why people waste time spewing nonsense on the internet and acting as if its factual simply because they say so. It's clear that you're woefully ignorant of the politics of the Muslim world in general. Please do yourself a favor and ensure that you're sufficiently familiar with a subject before you attempt to discuss it.Man, you must go to bed every single night wondering why there is no nation that follows Shariah law.
Yeah. You can't say that "this is Shari'ah" without demonstrating that this is actually the case if you expect to be taken seriously by anyone with a modicum of familiarity with the subject. Is this how you approach every topic you attempt to discuss? I hope to God not.You cannot force a way of belief onto another person. All you will harvest is falseness.
Better than your philosophical view of Islam that has no countries showing us what 'your' true waters are Kalam.
Your view is based on the current, transient state of affairs. Mine is based on the eternal and immutable.
Show us the proof of those waters Kalam.
http://www.holyquran.net/quran/index.html
Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia - Draft Constitution | Draft Constitution
Different from what? The false reality that exists only in your mind?Kalam, where is it different?
Define your terms.Where are these Sharia compliant leaders where muslims live in freedom?
The Messengers and the righteous successors.What islamic leader has honor and integrity?
'I get evasive manuvers.' [sic]I have learned much of what I know from your words. When I ask direct questions, I get evasive manuvers.
I provide examples from scripture. If you reject the truth as 'myth' then the problem is entirely on your end.When I ask for evidence, I get mythical knowledge.
Would you willingly divulge sensitive information to an enemy during a war?The fact that you admit that islam permits deception in some instances, says it all to me: it is not after the truth.
I don't care what you believe about Islam; that's between you and the Almighty. I'm here to correct people when they spread misinformation about the religion, not to engage in pointless discussions about the merits of Shari'ah when you insist on approaching the subject from a position of ignorance and prejudice.When you can demonstrate one islamic society that promotes: truth, freedom, learning, liberty, then maybe I will believe that some form of islam is a good religion. Until then, I see it promoting falseness, violence and murder.
Better than your philosophical view of Islam that has no countries showing us what 'your' true waters are Kalam.
Your view is based on the current, transient state of affairs. Mine is based on the eternal and immutable.
Show us the proof of those waters Kalam.
http://www.holyquran.net/quran/index.html
Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia - Draft Constitution | Draft Constitution
Can I translate that as: non-existant?
Incorrect. 'Deception' and 'corruption' aren't valid courses of action for a leader in a Shari'i government unless a war is taking place and 'deception' takes the form of espionage or counterespionage used against an enemy state.You have to admit the irony here. Islam will only allow leaders that are muslim. The 'leader' must proclaim to be of the faith while deceiving his way to corrupt positions.
Nope. If you're incapable of doing anything beyond pulling nonsense out of your ass then let me know so I can stop wasting my time with you.
Incorrect. The enforcement of Shari'ah has nothing to do with collective 'honor'. The enforcement of Shari'ah is not conditional. If a leader stands in violation of the Shari'ah, Shari'ah demands that he be brought to task.
Yeah... no.
I go to bed wondering why people waste time spewing nonsense on the internet and acting as if its factual simply because they say so. It's clear that you're woefully ignorant of the politics of the Muslim world in general. Please do yourself a favor and ensure that you're sufficiently familiar with a subject before you attempt to discuss it.
Yeah. You can't say that "this is Shari'ah" without demonstrating that this is actually the case if you expect to be taken seriously by anyone with a modicum of familiarity with the subject. Is this how you approach every topic you attempt to discuss? I hope to God not.You cannot force a way of belief onto another person. All you will harvest is falseness.
Kalam, where is it different? Where are these Sharia compliant leaders where muslims live in freedom? What islamic leader has honor and integrity?
I have learned much of what I know from your words. When I ask direct questions, I get evasive manuvers. When I ask for evidence, I get mythical knowledge. The fact that you admit that islam permits deception in some instances, says it all to me: it is not after the truth. When you can demonstrate one islamic society that promotes: truth, freedom, learning, liberty, then maybe I will believe that some form of islam is a good religion. Until then, I see it promoting falseness, violence and murder.
Islam is defined out of the following, known as the 5 pillars:
Shahada, the creed stating that "There is no God but God, and Muhammad is his messenger".
Salat, the prayer which is to be performed five times a day. This prayer is performed after strict rules: bending and uttering phrases from the Koran, as well as facing the direction towards the Ka'ba in Mecca.
Zakat, alms. This is a prescription which is practiced in very different ways in Islam today.
Sawm, fast during the month of Ramadan.
Hajj, pilgrimage to Mecca. This an obligation for all Muslims in good health and sufficiently good economic situation.
Within mainstream Islam, there are 3 levels: Islamism, which is the absolute variant, claiming that Islam is valid to all aspects of human life, promoting this to politics and world-wide missionary activities and willingly also violence and war; Conservatism, which just like Islamism, employs Islam for all aspects of life, but commonly within the family or the local community and it usually do not involve any violent acts; Moderates which are both intellectual and sectarian Muslims as well as Muslims with little attention and intensity to their religion.
At the next level there are numerous of orientations in terms of cult and myths. The mystical and the worship of mediators are among the most common. Mystical Islam is traditionally most active within Sunni Islam, and is summed up as Sufism, but spreads also into Shi'ism. The worship of mediators involves the worship of holy men and women in Sunni Islam, and the worship of both holy men and women as well as of the imams in Shi'i Islam. The worship of mediators may take the shape of idol worshipping or even polytheism, but in the larger cults this variant of Islam is interpreted as in total correspondence with the unique and single will of God.
Islam - LookLex Encyclopaedia
This is what it says on paper (the talk). Where do you see the practice (the walk)? In predominately muslim nations, life conditions are some of the worst in the world. I know there are those that claim "poets and scholars" in islam, but today, those same "poets and scholars" are brutally murdered if they stay inside an islamic community.
You keep saying you abhor the violence. Sharia is responsible for the violence. It is an inseperable part of islam, therefore the entire religion is an abomination on all men.
The people that are raised in islam and concentrate on the spiritual and ignore the Sharia (or do it as little as possible for actual survival) can be great people. The religion they follow will continue to spread deceit, not truth. As such, any rational (scientific) people should reject the teachings of Sharia as false and denounce it.
I reject Sharia. Most of the 79 nations in the UN who voted to keep the execution of gays without cause are Islamic majority nations.
The spiritual practices that are the five pillars of Islam are no problem to me.
Different from what? The false reality that exists only in your mind?Kalam, where is it different?
Define your terms.Where are these Sharia compliant leaders where muslims live in freedom?
The Messengers and the righteous successors.
'I get evasive manuvers.' [sic]
Please provide examples of these evasive maneuvers.
I provide examples from scripture. If you reject the truth as 'myth' then the problem is entirely on your end.
Would you willingly divulge sensitive information to an enemy during a war?The fact that you admit that islam permits deception in some instances, says it all to me: it is not after the truth.
I don't care what you believe about Islam; that's between you and the Almighty. I'm here to correct people when they spread misinformation about the religion, not to engage in pointless discussions about the merits of Shari'ah when you insist on approaching the subject from a position of ignorance and prejudice.When you can demonstrate one islamic society that promotes: truth, freedom, learning, liberty, then maybe I will believe that some form of islam is a good religion. Until then, I see it promoting falseness, violence and murder.
Actually, you've tended more toward using conjecture and your own baseless assumptions. Like most who attempt to criticize Islam, you're guilty of confirmation bias to an extreme degree."When you can demonstrate one islamic society" (or leader) "that promotes: truth, freedom, learning, liberty", there will be honor and integrity.
When I have asked you about islam in the past, I used "your" links for information on islam.
...The difference being that some sort of Caliphate existed for over 1,000 years and many of the states that have used a form of this model have been some of history's most successful (Rashidun, 'Abbasid, pre-Selim II Ottoman Empire, etc.) Your arguments regarding 'conditions' are groundless and asinine since not even the worst and most immoral leaders in these societies did anything that wasn't also common practice among their Christian contemporaries. To which form of government should it be compared? American 'democracy'? The United States disenfranchised a large portion of its population on the basis of race until just over 40 years ago. The sort of society you champion has the same history of misinterpretation and depravity and is no more immune to criticism. Approach the subject without bias or preconceptions and this will become apparent.I have asked you for any indication that it actually works. Your basic reaction has been similar to those that support communism: if it worked like it is supposed to work... (you will not observe how it actually doesn't work, or the terrible conditions that are imposed as a result of muslim leaders).
Actions and practices you attribute to 'Muslims' are immaterial to discussions of the religion itself unless it can be established that a particular action had a firm basis in a legitimate reading of scripture. The Qur'an isn't responsible for everything those who read it happen to do -- your arguments will fall flat until you realize this and attempt to criticize the religion on more legitimate grounds.You are being intellectually dishonest. When I point out real horrors that happen under islam, you want to say it is "misinformation" or "prejudice". How many times do these terrible things need to happen before you recognize that they are happening under islam more than any other "religion"?
When you put forward ridiculous arguments, I treat them with the low amount of respect I feel that they deserve.When I make a point, you get on your intellectual high horse and pretend that I am not worthy of hearing.
'Evidence' that has yet to make an appearance and any of your posts. Yawn.If you will not answer simple questions of a faith you claim to be "the only way", it makes me believe that you either have not considered the "truth" or choose to believe and embrace something where evidence demonstrates is destructive to any society it overtakes.
Incorrect. 'Deception' and 'corruption' aren't valid courses of action for a leader in a Shari'i government unless a war is taking place and 'deception' takes the form of espionage or counterespionage used against an enemy state.
Nope. If you're incapable of doing anything beyond pulling nonsense out of your ass then let me know so I can stop wasting my time with you.
Incorrect. The enforcement of Shari'ah has nothing to do with collective 'honor'. The enforcement of Shari'ah is not conditional. If a leader stands in violation of the Shari'ah, Shari'ah demands that he be brought to task.
Yeah... no.
I go to bed wondering why people waste time spewing nonsense on the internet and acting as if its factual simply because they say so. It's clear that you're woefully ignorant of the politics of the Muslim world in general. Please do yourself a favor and ensure that you're sufficiently familiar with a subject before you attempt to discuss it.
Yeah. You can't say that "this is Shari'ah" without demonstrating that this is actually the case if you expect to be taken seriously by anyone with a modicum of familiarity with the subject. Is this how you approach every topic you attempt to discuss? I hope to God not.
Kalam, where is it different? Where are these Sharia compliant leaders where muslims live in freedom? What islamic leader has honor and integrity?
I have learned much of what I know from your words. When I ask direct questions, I get evasive manuvers. When I ask for evidence, I get mythical knowledge. The fact that you admit that islam permits deception in some instances, says it all to me: it is not after the truth. When you can demonstrate one islamic society that promotes: truth, freedom, learning, liberty, then maybe I will believe that some form of islam is a good religion. Until then, I see it promoting falseness, violence and murder.
Once again, you indict the entire religion, and all who practice it, as false, violent and murderous.
That is wrong.
There is nothing wrong with the Five Pillars of Islam. Sufi poetry is beautiful and inspires peace. Islamic theocracies run by Shariah Law promote violence, prejudice against women and gays and false justification for terrorism.
Actually, you've tended more toward using conjecture and your own baseless assumptions. Like most who attempt to criticize Islam, you're guilty of confirmation bias to an extreme degree."When you can demonstrate one islamic society" (or leader) "that promotes: truth, freedom, learning, liberty", there will be honor and integrity.
When I have asked you about islam in the past, I used "your" links for information on islam.
...The difference being that some sort of Caliphate existed for over 1,000 years and many of the states that have used a form of this model have been some of history's most successful (Rashidun, 'Abbasid, pre-Selim II Ottoman Empire, etc.) Your arguments regarding 'conditions' are groundless and asinine since not even the worst and most immoral leaders in these societies did anything that wasn't also common practice among their Christian contemporaries. To which form of government should it be compared? American 'democracy'? The United States disenfranchised a large portion of its population on the basis of race until just over 40 years ago. The sort of society you champion has the same history of misinterpretation and depravity and is no more immune to criticism. Approach the subject without bias or preconceptions and this will become apparent.I have asked you for any indication that it actually works. Your basic reaction has been similar to those that support communism: if it worked like it is supposed to work... (you will not observe how it actually doesn't work, or the terrible conditions that are imposed as a result of muslim leaders).
Actions and practices you attribute to 'Muslims' are immaterial to discussions of the religion itself unless it can be established that a particular action had a firm basis in a legitimate reading of scripture. The Qur'an isn't responsible for everything those who read it happen to do -- your arguments will fall flat until you realize this and attempt to criticize the religion on more legitimate grounds.
When you put forward ridiculous arguments, I treat them with the low amount of respect I feel that they deserve.When I make a point, you get on your intellectual high horse and pretend that I am not worthy of hearing.
'Evidence' that has yet to make an appearance and any of your posts. Yawn.If you will not answer simple questions of a faith you claim to be "the only way", it makes me believe that you either have not considered the "truth" or choose to believe and embrace something where evidence demonstrates is destructive to any society it overtakes.
Actually, you've tended more toward using conjecture and your own baseless assumptions. Like most who attempt to criticize Islam, you're guilty of confirmation bias to an extreme degree."When you can demonstrate one islamic society" (or leader) "that promotes: truth, freedom, learning, liberty", there will be honor and integrity.
When I have asked you about islam in the past, I used "your" links for information on islam.
...The difference being that some sort of Caliphate existed for over 1,000 years and many of the states that have used a form of this model have been some of history's most successful (Rashidun, 'Abbasid, pre-Selim II Ottoman Empire, etc.) Your arguments regarding 'conditions' are groundless and asinine since not even the worst and most immoral leaders in these societies did anything that wasn't also common practice among their Christian contemporaries. To which form of government should it be compared? American 'democracy'? The United States disenfranchised a large portion of its population on the basis of race until just over 40 years ago. The sort of society you champion has the same history of misinterpretation and depravity and is no more immune to criticism. Approach the subject without bias or preconceptions and this will become apparent.
Actions and practices you attribute to 'Muslims' are immaterial to discussions of the religion itself unless it can be established that a particular action had a firm basis in a legitimate reading of scripture. The Qur'an isn't responsible for everything those who read it happen to do -- your arguments will fall flat until you realize this and attempt to criticize the religion on more legitimate grounds.
When you put forward ridiculous arguments, I treat them with the low amount of respect I feel that they deserve.
'Evidence' that has yet to make an appearance and any of your posts. Yawn.If you will not answer simple questions of a faith you claim to be "the only way", it makes me believe that you either have not considered the "truth" or choose to believe and embrace something where evidence demonstrates is destructive to any society it overtakes.
Denial is not just a river.
