Islam's European Conquest: Is America Next?

[actsnoblemartin]

you head is far buried up your pussy, you cant see rhime from reason

idiot

Islam, my dear, is not a government - it can't have 'policies'.

Islam has policies for law,justice , economics, personal matters and social interaction, it has policies for everything Islam and politics are inseparable.

Well, in that case Christianity has policies on everything as well - yet how many people follow them all or even know of/agree with them all? Do you know how many Muslims agree with/apply the Sharia law? How many of them do you think agree with public stoning, etc? You can't put them all in the same box - that's intellectually dishonest! It's not only impossible, but also potentially dangerous. There are millions upon millions on Muslims and I don't think they could all elect one person to speak for all of them - or even ten. There are Muslims that love drinking alcohol, there are Muslims that don't wear head-garb, there are Muslims that party A LOT, there are Muslims that are mathematicians, scientists, cooks, drug-addicts, taxi-drivers, people with families whose main concern is to take care of those families... They are just like the rest of us. One word, one concept, can't define us just as 'Islam' can't define all Muslims.

I wish you'd just stop this nonsense because it makes you look extremely narrow-minded and hateful.

 

[The_Halfmoon]

I was born here and so were my great, great, great, great, great, grandparents.

I am a convert to Islam and very happy to have left christianity.

well then why not MOVE to the middle east? it's a very wealthy area, the food is good, the people are nice, and most importantly they encourage your religion

Why should the West change its liberal traditions to appease someone who would be equally content living in the mecca of their culture... hell, LITERALLY living near mecca

Here you are working and hoping to change Iran into some homo loving paradise that rejects Islam and hijib. But in other threads acknowledge that 99% of Iranians are happy with Iran being culturally Islamic and want to keep it that way.

Yet when I suggest that America will eventually have to adopt some Islamic standards in the future, due to more muslims in the population. You basically tell me to move.

Sounds like a double standard to me

there is nothing wrong with Iran being culturally islamic... but not LEGALLY islamic. If you don't like homos, fine, ban them from your home and tell your children to avoid them. But don't ask the state to throw rocks at their half-burried bodies or execute rape VICTIMS who did not even consent to homosexuality... and don't enforce women to wear the hijab.. if they chose to, great. But if not, let them wear what they please. But I don't recall saying the second part anyway, not 99%... but I post a lot it seems so I can lose track.

And the west can't allow Sharia law into its legal system because it clearly violates the equality of men and women in the divorce process (assuming we're only talking about sharia tribunals for divorce and not the many other things that contradict western values)

 

[The_Halfmoon]

well then why not MOVE to the middle east? it's a very wealthy area, the food is good, the people are nice, and most importantly they encourage your religion

Why should the West change its liberal traditions to appease someone who would be equally content living in the mecca of their culture... hell, LITERALLY living near mecca

Here you are working and hoping to change Iran into some homo loving paradise that rejects Islam and hijib. But in other threads acknowledge that 99% of Iranians are happy with Iran being culturally Islamic and want to keep it that way.

Yet when I suggest that America will eventually have to adopt some Islamic standards in the future, due to more muslims in the population. You basically tell me to move.

Sounds like a double standard to me

Best hope Iran ever had was the Shah. Worst enemy to modernization, Jimmy Carter.

You think Carter "opened the door" for Khomeini as it were? That's not something I've looked too much into, but it did seem clear that he thought he was a Gandhi-like figure. If so, how naive.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

well then why not MOVE to the middle east? it's a very wealthy area, the food is good, the people are nice, and most importantly they encourage your religion

Why should the West change its liberal traditions to appease someone who would be equally content living in the mecca of their culture... hell, LITERALLY living near mecca

Here you are working and hoping to change Iran into some homo loving paradise that rejects Islam and hijib. But in other threads acknowledge that 99% of Iranians are happy with Iran being culturally Islamic and want to keep it that way.

Yet when I suggest that America will eventually have to adopt some Islamic standards in the future, due to more muslims in the population. You basically tell me to move.

Sounds like a double standard to me

there is nothing wrong with Iran being culturally islamic... but not LEGALLY islamic. If you don't like homos, fine, ban them from your home and tell your children to avoid them. But don't ask the state to throw rocks at their half-burried bodies or execute rape VICTIMS who did not even consent to homosexuality... and don't enforce women to wear the hijab.. if they chose to, great. But if not, let them wear what they please. But I don't recall saying the second part anyway, not 99%... but I post a lot it seems so I can lose track.

And the west can't allow Sharia law into its legal system because it clearly violates the equality of men and women in the divorce process (assuming we're only talking about sharia tribunals for divorce and not the many other things that contradict western values)

The basic problem is values, In the west we have an unspoken agreement , we will not kill each other for the way we believe and the way we think or what we think,

It falls apart sometimes but in general it works well enough and we get along by and large.
When you introduce an ideology that requires adherents to kill those who do not believe the way you do, the society is headed for collapse and destruction.

 

[The_Halfmoon]

Here you are working and hoping to change Iran into some homo loving paradise that rejects Islam and hijib. But in other threads acknowledge that 99% of Iranians are happy with Iran being culturally Islamic and want to keep it that way.

Yet when I suggest that America will eventually have to adopt some Islamic standards in the future, due to more muslims in the population. You basically tell me to move.

Sounds like a double standard to me

there is nothing wrong with Iran being culturally islamic... but not LEGALLY islamic. If you don't like homos, fine, ban them from your home and tell your children to avoid them. But don't ask the state to throw rocks at their half-burried bodies or execute rape VICTIMS who did not even consent to homosexuality... and don't enforce women to wear the hijab.. if they chose to, great. But if not, let them wear what they please. But I don't recall saying the second part anyway, not 99%... but I post a lot it seems so I can lose track.

And the west can't allow Sharia law into its legal system because it clearly violates the equality of men and women in the divorce process (assuming we're only talking about sharia tribunals for divorce and not the many other things that contradict western values)

The basic problem is values, In the west we have an unspoken agreement , we will not kill each other for the way we believe and the way we think or what we think,

It falls apart sometimes but in general it works well enough and we get along by and large.
When you introduce an ideology that requires adherents to kill those who do not believe the way you do, the society is headed for collapse and destruction.

exactly... I have no problem whatsoever with how or why someone prays... but if your religion requires you to force the government to abhor the freedom of others, too bad.

If you beat your wife, it's the government's responsibility to protect the physical safety of its citizens... I don't care what your religion says.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

there is nothing wrong with Iran being culturally islamic... but not LEGALLY islamic. If you don't like homos, fine, ban them from your home and tell your children to avoid them. But don't ask the state to throw rocks at their half-burried bodies or execute rape VICTIMS who did not even consent to homosexuality... and don't enforce women to wear the hijab.. if they chose to, great. But if not, let them wear what they please. But I don't recall saying the second part anyway, not 99%... but I post a lot it seems so I can lose track.

And the west can't allow Sharia law into its legal system because it clearly violates the equality of men and women in the divorce process (assuming we're only talking about sharia tribunals for divorce and not the many other things that contradict western values)

The basic problem is values, In the west we have an unspoken agreement , we will not kill each other for the way we believe and the way we think or what we think,

It falls apart sometimes but in general it works well enough and we get along by and large.
When you introduce an ideology that requires adherents to kill those who do not believe the way you do, the society is headed for collapse and destruction.

exactly... I have no problem whatsoever with how or why someone prays... but if your religion requires you to force the government to abhor the freedom of others, too bad.

If you beat your wife, it's the government's responsibility to protect the physical safety of its citizens... I don't care what your religion says.

Or when the government is so terrified on the threat of violence it squelches free speech.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/europe/86216-british-lion-muzzled.html

 

[AVG-JOE]

although it's crazy that western countries would even consider sharia law... I highly doubt Islam will take over in the next few generations... give it a few centuries maybe

If our children don't trade religious dogma and tradition for freedom of personal belief systems and begin reaching for the stars in a few centuries, they may never.

(Insert your preferred Deity here) bless our children.

-Joe

 

[AVG-JOE]

I was born here and so were my great, great, great, great, great, grandparents.

I am a convert to Islam and very happy to have left christianity.

well then why not MOVE to the middle east? it's a very wealthy area, the food is good, the people are nice, and most importantly they encourage your religion

Why should the West change its liberal traditions to appease someone who would be equally content living in the mecca of their culture... hell, LITERALLY living near mecca

Here you are working and hoping to change Iran into some homo loving paradise that rejects Islam and hijib. But in other threads acknowledge that 99% of Iranians are happy with Iran being culturally Islamic and want to keep it that way.

Yet when I suggest that America will eventually have to adopt some Islamic standards in the future, due to more muslims in the population. You basically tell me to move.

Sounds like a double standard to me

Freedom has been tasted on this planet. Not just the Western version of it, lots of cultures survived the European expansion that led to todays political boundaries. The first population that can figure out a way to pass the resources of our world on to the next generation in peace might see their children reach the stars.

-Joe

 

[Fatality]

Yeah, in addition to these:

For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. - Matthew 5:18-19

It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid. - Luke 16:17

Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place. - Matthew 5:17​

All written in red letters, cousin.

those quotes are all true. Although it seems you hold a pharasaical interpretation to the law, as did the other of the enemies of Jesus, so youre not doing anything new.

lets see how Jesus applied them.

John 8

But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" "No one, sir," she said. "Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin."

When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life." The Pharisees challenged him, "Here you are, appearing as your own witness; your testimony is not valid."

Jesus answered, "Even if I testify on my own behalf, my testimony is valid, for I know where I came from and where I am going. But you have no idea where I come from or where I am going. You judge by human standards; I pass judgment on no one. But if I do judge, my decisions are right, because I am not alone. I stand with the Father, who sent me. In your own Law it is written that the testimony of two men is valid. I am one who testifies for myself; my other witness is the Father, who sent me." Then they asked him, "Where is your father?" "You do not know me or my Father," Jesus replied. "If you knew me, you would know my Father also."

clearly jesus and the pharisees had a different interpretation of the law, Jesus offered forgiveness, love, and the promise of new life. the pharisees offered a stoning and certian death; no forgivness, no new life, no love.

So did Jesus contradict himself, or was John's account inaccurate?

no, it would be your comprehension of the material that is flawed.

 

[Neser Boha]

you head is far buried up your pussy, you cant see rhime from reason

idiot

Islam has policies for law,justice , economics, personal matters and social interaction, it has policies for everything Islam and politics are inseparable.

Well, in that case Christianity has policies on everything as well - yet how many people follow them all or even know of/agree with them all? Do you know how many Muslims agree with/apply the Sharia law? How many of them do you think agree with public stoning, etc? You can't put them all in the same box - that's intellectually dishonest! It's not only impossible, but also potentially dangerous. There are millions upon millions on Muslims and I don't think they could all elect one person to speak for all of them - or even ten. There are Muslims that love drinking alcohol, there are Muslims that don't wear head-garb, there are Muslims that party A LOT, there are Muslims that are mathematicians, scientists, cooks, drug-addicts, taxi-drivers, people with families whose main concern is to take care of those families... They are just like the rest of us. One word, one concept, can't define us just as 'Islam' can't define all Muslims.

I wish you'd just stop this nonsense because it makes you look extremely narrow-minded and hateful.

I wish people that consider themselves so far intellectually superior to me would at least learn to spell. Seriously, it does take away from your already impoverished little statement. Do you have a counter-argument, some sort of rebuttal, or are you just trolling which is not helping anyone - not even your own cause?

 

[mystic]

you head is far buried up your pussy, you cant see rhime from reason

idiot

Wow, you're soooo classy. Was that English? "you head is far buried"?

Anybody else think his quote from Socrates, "The unexamined life is not worth living," is just a tad bit ironic?

 

[mal]

Well, in that case Christianity has policies on everything as well - yet how many people follow them all or even know of/agree with them all? Do you know how many Muslims agree with/apply the Sharia law? How many of them do you think agree with public stoning, etc? .

I Know this... More than one Islamic Country IS Stoning People to Death...

For things like Accusations of Infidelity...

And NO Christian Country is.

Because it's not Every Single Last One of them, doesn't Negate what it is.

That's a Weak Deflection.

Islam is a Brutal and Barbaric Religion in MANY Regions of the World, and it has Control of Governments...



peace...

 

[Neser Boha]

Well, in that case Christianity has policies on everything as well - yet how many people follow them all or even know of/agree with them all? Do you know how many Muslims agree with/apply the Sharia law? How many of them do you think agree with public stoning, etc? .

I Know this... More than one Islamic Country IS Stoning People to Death...

For things like Accusations of Infidelity...

And NO Christian Country is.

Because it's not Every Single Last One of them, doesn't Negate what it is.

That's a Weak Deflection.

Islam is a Brutal and Barbaric Religion in MANY Regions of the World, and it has Control of Governments...



peace...

Well, I'm glad you've got it all figured out like this. I'm sure your opinion of the entire Islam being evil as well as all of its followers is going to make the world a better place.

Do you ever think of it this way? "What am I fighting for?" and "How does what I say/think impact the world around me?" I'm being serious. Generalizations have always been dangerous as history has proven to us over and over again - with millions being slaughtered for what - some stupid-ass fucked up 'generalization'.

I've had numerous bad experiences with gypsies (to be pc - the Roma people) in my life because I'm from a town that was split among: the Roma, the neo-nazis, the anarchists (on Roma side), and the rest that didn't care. By all the experiences and all I've been told about gypsies, I could be hating them and people could rationalize my hate. But guess what, I realized, by the ripe ol' age of 16, that that shit just doesn't fly and one can't condemn any group for actions of a few individuals (not that I ever actually did that when I was younger). I wish Muslims were also seen as individuals with different interests, opinions, wishes, rather than a group that is defined by the fucked-up minority.



I also wish you replied to the rest of the comment I made, not just that little excerpt.

 

[mystic]

I'm against your inability to comprehend what you read. I fully support Individual Liberty and Government by the consent of the Governed. I Believe in Inalienable Right and Separation of Church and State. Civil Law Governs the State and Sharia Law has no place there. I do not want the USA to look like any version of Sharia Law. Why do you get that impression?

I'll have you know, my English reading comprehension is excellent. Perhaps I need to go over things with you again. A little slower this time.

I said:

The price of liberty is in allowing difference of opinion. Which can be quite painful sometimes.

You think I want to hear what the Klan wants to say? Nope. Personally, I think they're evil. But I support their right to gather and make speeches. A right given to them by the constitution. You want to start outlawing things which you think are dangerous? That is a slippery slope.

You gotta take the good with the bad. That's the price of liberty.

then you said:

I think that you got off on the wrong floor. The end result of your scenario is Jail, enslavement, and death, by giving those power over you, through their exercise of Religion. You hurt yourself and those around you by your denial, by your blindness; nor are you Justified by manipulation of Constitutional Principle. There is no place for Sharia Law in the USA.

So I say how the price of liberty is allowing freedom of speech and dissent even (from things that you find distastful) and you tell me that I've gotten off on the wrong floor; that "my scenerio" leads to enslavement and death...which means that you are against freedom of speech and dissent. Are you following so far? Comprehend?
That is why I said you would like to implement "your" version of sharia. No dissent allowed. No freedom of speech. Only your religion allowed to be practiced... Actually, that's not being fair to sharia.

 

[mystic]

The west will just have to change.

Because muslims will continue to dress and act as muslims reguardless of past traditions or ideals.

bullshit, we are not changing to please you. learn to behave like civilsed people instead of 7th century barbarians

Learn to spell first and maybe people will listen to you

Maybe he's British.

 

[mystic]

Sorry about the mischaracterization , feel free to rejoin the thread at your leisure.
You seem a reasonable person who can disagree with out being to terribly disagreeable..

Same to you.

 

[Intense]

Well, I was doing that in another thread and you ran away .
What is the price of liberty?

Which thread? I don't recall running away.

The price of liberty? I'll tell you the price of liberty.

The price of liberty is in allowing difference of opinion. Which can be quite painful sometimes.

You think I want to hear what the Klan wants to say? Nope. Personally, I think they're evil. But I support their right to gather and make speeches. A right given to them by the constitution. You want to start outlawing things which you think are dangerous? That is a slippery slope.



You gotta take the good with the bad. That's the price of liberty.

I think that you got off on the wrong floor. The end result of your scenario is Jail, enslavement, and death, by giving those power over you, through their exercise of Religion. You hurt yourself and those around you by your denial, by your blindness; nor are you Justified by manipulation of Constitutional Principle. There is no place for Sharia Law in the USA.

Let me try this from a different perspective.

Opening the door to Sharia Law is the slippery slope. There is no recovery from totalitarianism. This is not a free speech issue, this is undermining civil law. Opinion is a right, we take the good with the bad. Agreed. The same applies to voice. Sharia Law is Unconstitutional and had no legitimate place here.

 

[Intense]

Conclusion

The nightmare must end. Sharia oppresses the citizens of Islamic countries. Islam must reform, but the legal hierarchy in Islamic nations will not do this because the judges and legal scholars understand the cost: many passages in the Quran and the hadith must be rejected, and this they cannot do. After all, the Quran came down directly from Allah through Gabriel, so says traditional theology. So how can Islam reform? But reform it must. It can start by rewriting classical fiqh (interpretations of law). Again, though, that would mean leaving behind the Quran and Muhammad's example. How can the legal hierarchy in Islamic nations do this?

In contrast, the West has undergone the Enlightenment or the Age of Reason (c. 1600—1800+), so western law has been injected with a heavy dose of reason. Also, the New Testament tempers excessive punishments. At least when Christianity reformed (c. 1400—1600), the reformers went back to the New Testament, which preaches peace and love. So religion and reason in the West permit justice to be found more readily—the Medieval Church is not foundational to Christianity; only Jesus and the New Testament are.

Can Islamic countries benefit from an Enlightenment that may deny the Quran and the hadith? This seems impossible. Islamic law threatens Muslims with death if they criticize Muhammad and the Quran, not to mention denying them.

Since Islamic law cannot be reformed without doing serious damage to original and authentic Islam—the one taught by Muhammad—then a second plan must be played out. Sharia must never spread around the world. At least that much is clear and achievable. The hard evidence in this article demonstrates beyond doubt that sharia does not benefit any society, for it contains too many harsh rules and punishments.

One of the most tragic and under—reported occurrences in the West in recent years is the existence of a sharia court in Canada. Muslims are pushing for a sharia divorce courting Australia as well. Having a court of arbitration if it is based on western law and legal theory is legitimate, but sharia does not hold to this standard. Whether sharia is imposed gradually or rapidly, Canada should promptly shut down any sharia court, and Australia should never allow one. Such a court should never be permitted in the US, the rest of the West, or anywhere else in the world that is battling Islam.

It is true that the Enlightenment teaches tolerance, but it also teaches critical thinking and reasoning. Sharia cannot stand up under scrutiny. It is intolerant and excessive, and Aristotle in his Nicomachean Ethics teaches the West that excess is never just.

Thankfully, the province of Quebec, Canada, has forbidden sharia. This is the right initiative.

Sharia ultimately degrades society and diminishes freedom.


Supplemental material:

In private emails to me or on websites, Muslim apologists (defenders) claim that the Islamic way of dealing with vices is superior to the western way, even in Islam's punishments like flogging and stoning. It is true that the West is filled with decadence, but are Islamic countries pure and pristine through and through, as these Muslim apologists imply? To anyone whose mind has not been clouded by a lifetime of devotion to Islam, the answer to this rhetorical question is obvious. Alcohol and other intoxicants and gambling serve as test cases.

This article says that Bahrain, an island and independent sate that is connected to Saudi Arabia by a causeway, provides a 'breathing lung' for Saudis because this Islamic island allows the free flow of alcohol and a night life. The words 'breathing lung' in Bahrain mean that Saudi Arabia suffocates people. On the weekends an average of 40,000 cars line up to cross the bridge.

This article discusses the smuggling of alcohol in Saudi Arabia and says:

"Western analysts note that alcohol smuggling of the magnitude underway in Saudi Arabia —— perhaps tens of millions of dollars' worth of illegal merchandise annually —— would likely involve the complicity of Saudi customs agents and perhaps a higher—level patron."

This article reveals how Iranians get around the official ban on alcohol, like beer and vodka and other intoxicants, like opium. A black market has sprung up—just like the one in America during Prohibition.

This article says that even though the Taliban, the tyrants who formerly ruled Afghanistan, outlawed the growth of poppies, which are the source of opium, the leaders of the Taliban may have profited from the drug trade. The new and democratic government has a hard time keeping this drug under control.

This article says that authorities in Turkey threaten to imprison online gamblers, and this page links to a report (scroll to the second one) that discusses how Turkey must deal with the problem of monetary interest, alcohol, and gambling. It is revealing to see how Muslim religious leaders try to squirm out of Quranic laws against interest, in order to help Islamic financial institutions make money.

The purpose of these links is not to condemn Islamic countries or to assert that the West is better than they are. Facts say that the West has many problems. Rather, the purpose is to demonstrate that Islamic countries have their share of problems as well. This means that Islamic countries are also decadent. This means that Islamic punishments do not work entirely (except by scare tactics), but they can drive the sin or crime underground.

on "Top ten reasons why sharia is bad for all societies"


American Thinker: Top ten reasons why sharia is bad for all societies

 

[Sunni Man]

LOL!!! that's the stupidist post I have ever read

 

[Intense]

Chop Chop.