Judge Blocks Oklahoma’s Ban on Using Shariah Law in Court

[Sunni Man]

...but here is your second chance....do you or do you not support the fatwa against Rushdie...?

What other countries do in relationship to Rushdie is not of concern to me.

And has no effect on my life in any way.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

...but here is your second chance....do you or do you not support the fatwa against Rushdie...?

What other countries do in relationship to Rushdie is not of concern to me.

And has no effect on my life in any way.

Yes it does...it was an event that had repercussions around the world....

...but such is the typical evasion of a stealth muslim who cannot answer because he will expose himself.....or else does not want to face the truth...

....and i am sure you support fatwas in general because... as you said... you support punishment of those who would treat your religion irreverently....

 

[logical4u]

It appears that you do not believe in free speech.

I believe in Free Speech as the Founding Fathers intended.

Not the idiotic interpretation foisted on the American people by the judiciary.

Your support of Shariah law is in direct conflict with the intention of the Founding Fathers. They were well aware of islam at that time, and as this was a "new" country, could have adapted Sharia law at that time. They clearly rejected Sharia in all aspects when they formed the government for this country.

 

[Sunni Man]

...but here is your second chance....do you or do you not support the fatwa against Rushdie...?

What other countries do in relationship to Rushdie is not of concern to me.

And has no effect on my life in any way.

Yes it does...it was an event that had repercussions around the world....

Didn't effect my life in any way.

I still had to go to work, pay the bills, fix the leak in the roof, etc.

How did it effect your's ?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

What other countries do in relationship to Rushdie is not of concern to me.

And has no effect on my life in any way.

Yes it does...it was an event that had repercussions around the world....

Didn't effect my life in any way.

I still had to go to work, pay the bills, fix the leak in the roof, etc.

How did it effect your's ?

It affected both your life and mine.....we're talking about it aren't we...?

 

[Sunni Man]

Yes it does...it was an event that had repercussions around the world....

Didn't effect my life in any way.

I still had to go to work, pay the bills, fix the leak in the roof, etc.

How did it effect your's ?

It affected both your life and mine.....we're talking about it aren't we...?

Only because you brought it up.

But if he walked in front of a moving bus.

I wouldn't shed a tear.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Didn't effect my life in any way.

I still had to go to work, pay the bills, fix the leak in the roof, etc.

How did it effect your's ?

It affected both your life and mine.....we're talking about it aren't we...?

Only because you brought it up.

But if he walked in front of a moving bus.

I wouldn't shed a tear.

Of course you wouldn't.....i believe i see your face in this crowd....

 

[Gadawg73]

We should do the same thing here.

I can't stand people who burn the flag.

American's have been brain washed into thinking that burning the flag is Free Speech and normal.

It is UnAmerican and retarded.

There is No way that this is what the Founding Fathers had in mind when drawing up the Constitution.

Free speech is defined by the US Constitution. I have gone over this before with you.
We are a nation of LAWS, not people and their beliefs, feelings, desires, opinions and thoughts on their differing religions.
Doesn't matter what you and I believe what the Founders had in mind. Free speech is the law.

 

[Sunni Man]

The Rushdie story was much like the O.J. Simpson news story.

Something for people to talk about in the break room at work.

But didn't affect my daily life at all.

And I wouldn't have shed a tear if O.J. walked in front of the same moving bus.

Would you?

 

[Sunni Man]

Free speech is defined by the US Constitution. I have gone over this before with you.
We are a nation of LAWS, not people and their beliefs, feelings, desires, opinions and thoughts on their differing religions.
Doesn't matter what you and I believe what the Founders had in mind. Free speech is the law.

No, not all speech is free speech.

Yelling fire in a crowded room when there is no fire is not protected.

Speech that causes a riot is not protected.

Threatening Speech directed at the President is not protected.

See, there is limits to free speech.

I am just saying that the limits need to be tightened.

 

[JenT]

Dear idiot , you can not discriminate against any religion in US government.

man I wish the constitution meant something to you assholes.

Who said anything about religion? It's a matter of law. This is the United States, if you come here, you abide by our laws.

Do we go to other countries and demand they institute our laws?

 

[JenT]

Free speech is defined by the US Constitution. I have gone over this before with you.
We are a nation of LAWS, not people and their beliefs, feelings, desires, opinions and thoughts on their differing religions.
Doesn't matter what you and I believe what the Founders had in mind. Free speech is the law.

No, not all speech is free speech.

Yelling fire in a crowded room when there is no fire is not protected.

Speech that causes a riot is not protected.

Threatening Speech directed at the President is not protected.

See, there is limits to free speech.

I am just saying that the limits need to be tightened.

Yep, which is what Oklahoma did. These are activist judges legislating from the bench and should be held accountable for obvious special interest activism better known as outright treason.

 

[Gadawg73]

Free speech is defined by the US Constitution. I have gone over this before with you.
We are a nation of LAWS, not people and their beliefs, feelings, desires, opinions and thoughts on their differing religions.
Doesn't matter what you and I believe what the Founders had in mind. Free speech is the law.

No, not all speech is free speech.

Yelling fire in a crowded room when there is no fire is not protected.

Speech that causes a riot is not protected.

Threatening Speech directed at the President is not protected.

See, there is limits to free speech.

I am just saying that the limits need to be tightened.

I agree with all of that but you can burn whatever you want and a "flag" is hard to define as "American" so burning one has been deemed as free speech.
Not by you and I.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Free speech is defined by the US Constitution. I have gone over this before with you.
We are a nation of LAWS, not people and their beliefs, feelings, desires, opinions and thoughts on their differing religions.
Doesn't matter what you and I believe what the Founders had in mind. Free speech is the law.

No, not all speech is free speech.

Yelling fire in a crowded room when there is no fire is not protected.

Speech that causes a riot is not protected.

Threatening Speech directed at the President is not protected.

See, there is limits to free speech.

I am just saying that the limits need to be tightened.

We know what you are saying....

 

[Sunni Man]

Islam has enjoyed centuries of debate between religious scholars; Muslim, Christians, and Jews.

It is a time honored tradition going all the way back to Muhammad.

When he would welcome non muslim visitors to his mosque and have group debates for several days.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Islam has enjoyed centuries of debate between religious scholars; Muslim, Christians, and Jews.

It is a time honored tradition going all the way back to Muhammad.

When he would welcome non muslim visitors to his mosque and have group debates for several days.

All the way back to Mohammed's debate in Mecca....?

When the Arab Intellectuals Debated Muhammad
Author: Mumin Salih
Publication: Islam-Watch
Date: June 15, 2008
URL: Islam Watch - "When the Arab Intellectuals Debated Mohammed" by Mumin Salih

Fourteen hundreds years ago, the most important debate in the history of Islam took place publicly in Mecca between Mohammed and a panel of Arab intellectuals. We probably will never know the full details of that debate because Muslims have heavily censored the history of Arabia. But there is enough information between the lines of these heavily censored documents that point to Mohammed's appalling performance. The debate had disastrous consequences on Islam and silenced Mohammed for years. Islam was destined to vanish in its infancy.

This article is a byproduct of my search to find any shred of evidence to the Muslims' claims that the Quran stunned the early Arabs. This is another topic, which, hopefully will be the subject of another article. All the evidence in the Islamic sources, including the Quran, point to the fact that the Quran was never liked by the early Arabs, or indeed by any intellectual Arab, even in our time. This article is a blow to those Muslim scholars who have the cheek to make their claims in the face of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It is also in honour of those great minds of the Meccan Arabs, who, without shedding a drop of blood exposed Mohammed and his lies and attempted thwart Islam's advance.


The background

The seventh century Mecca was a thriving city and a fully established commercial and cultural center in Arabia. A climate of religious tolerance prevailed that allowed all tribes to practice their religions freely. The pre Islamic Arabs were not isolated in their peninsula but kept in touch with the outside world. They mixed and traded with the neighboring nations and were well aware of the cultures and civilizations in the north and the south. The Arabs had already established two kingdoms in the north that had strategic alliances with the Romans and the Persians. The Arabs had their own refined culture as reflected in their fine poetry, which the Arabs still consider to be the best they ever had.

Mohammed made use of the prevailing religious-tolerance culture, and claimed he was a prophet. The Meccan Arabs did not automatically reject his claims, but they gave him a chance to present his case to a group of well-known intellectuals- the chance to make any clarifications or to answer any questions. Those intellectuals of Mecca included Abul Hakam Ibn Hisham and Al Nadr Ibn AlHarith. Both were well-traveled, and articulated and renowned for their wisdom and profound knowledge of the neighboring cultures. Those intellectuals read with open, but critical minds what Mohammed had purportedly claimed Allah had revealed in his Quran. Those men must have noticed that the Quran contained many serious errors and expected Mohammed to give good reasons for his claims of divine revelations. Those Arab intellectual demanded answers and clarifications to the many questions raised by the Quran and Mohammed's claims as all intellectuals would do when they review a new literary wok. Those critics were asking the same questions about the Quran that we still ask in our time without getting any answers from the Muslims scholars.

It appears that Mohammed was taken aback when those great men of Mecca pointed to the weaknesses of the Quran. They pressed hard demanding answers and explanations to the irrationalities they spotted in the Quran, but Mohammed stood there, wordless and powerless. The debate left Mohammed psychologically traumatized. When the intellectual grilling was over, Mohammed began to recall the events of the day and the stressful moments he endured. He recalled some of the hard questions he couldn't answer and framed them in new verses as a means to preserve his self-esteem. Mohammed recorded his feelings about that debate in the Quran, as he often did in times of stress.

Here are a few samples of those verses expressing Mohammed's frustration (Translation of Hilali and Khan)

In these verses, the troubled Mohammed was talking to himself through his imaginary god; one could sense that he probably wished if he had never mentioned the Quran to the Meccans at all:

7: 2. the Qur'ân sent down unto you so let not your breast be narrow therefrom….

11: 12. So perchance you may give up a part of what is revealed unto you, and that your breast feels straitened for it ….

20: 2. We have not sent down the Qur'ân unto you to cause you distress.

In sura 21 (Anbyaa), Mohammed indirectly admits his failure and describes clearly what the Arabs thought of him and his Quran:

21: 5. .. they say:"These are mixed up false dreams! Nay, he has invented it! Nay, he is a poet! Let him then bring us an Ayâh (sign as a proof) like the ones that were sent before

According to the above verse, the Arabs described the Quran as dream hallucinations, or fabrications, and asked Mohammed to produce a convincing proof like the previous prophets did. This is clear evidence that the Arabs did not believe the Quran had what it takes to be accepted as a convincing proof. Contrary to what modern Muslims claim, far from being stunned on hearing the Quran, the Arabs of Mecca spotted its inferior style. Immediately and rightly they concluded that Mohammed must have made it up. The Arabs had contacts with the neighboring nations and were aware of the ancient religious beliefs. The contents of the Quran were not new to them and they correctly described it as just old tales:

16: 24. And when it is said to them: "What is it that your Lord has sent down?" They say: "Tales of the men of old!"

More interesting revelations come in sura 19 (Yunis) where the Quran clearly describes how the Arabs expressed their distaste to its language style. The Arabs openly asked Mohammed to discard the nonsense he had been uttering and say something of higher standard. Failing that, they suggested to him to do some corrections and editing to make his Quran acceptable. Understandably, Mohammed's own opinion was that the Quran was good and that was the best answer he could provide. He expected every body else to share him his opinion about his Quran. The last thing he wanted to hear was that his Quran was full with mistakes and needed amendments. The following verse describes that tense moment as Mohammed stood, totally astounded, in front of those intellectuals. He was unprepared for the critical remarks by those highly knowledgeable scholars. As reflected in his answer, he was surprised, confused and shaken in his confidence. One would expect Mohammed to stand firm in defense of his Quran and to clarify any inaccuracies or ambiguous parts. Instead, he unashamedly retreated and blamed it all on Allah! When the Meccans pressed for answers, Mohammed's response was most disgraceful: I cannot bring you better than this and don't blame me for it, I only follow orders!

10: 15. And when Our Clear Verses are recited unto them, those who hope not for their meeting with Us, say: Bring us a Qur'ân other than this, or change it."Say "It is not for me to change it on my own accord; I only follow that which is revealed unto me.

As a result of that debate Mohammed's lies and personality were exposed. As the Arab intellectuals made a mockery of him because of his inability to defend his Quran or justify his claims, he suffered of intellectual defeat and embarrassing social humiliation. Allah understood well Mohammed's disposition, He quickly revealed:

21:36. …they take you not except for mockery..

25: 41. And when they see you, they treat you only as a mockery

Mohammed lived about five years in Mecca after this debate, but his activities came to a near standstill. Having discovered his true personality, the Meccan Arabs treated him as a madman and turned away from him. But they had full respect for his civil rights. They did not see in him a significant danger to the society more than any other madman would pose. They left him alone in his imaginary world and allowed him to believe in whatever religion he wanted. This is well described in the Quran in the following verses:

When the Arab Intellectuals Debated Muhammad

 

[Sunni Man]

Straight from the web site "Islam-Watch"

They try to make Muhammad into some kind of failure in his ministry.

Yet there are 1.5 billion muslims (25% of the world)

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Straight from the web site "Islam-Watch"

They try to make Muhammad into some kind of failure in his ministry.

Yet there are 1.5 billion muslims (25% of the world)

Mohammed was a failure in Mecca....the Arab intellectuals of his own time mocked him because he could not justify his claims.....and once they knew his personality they thought him a madman....

Mohammed later became a success in Medina.....but only via politics and jihad...expanding his religion by the sword...but this history is not typically taught to muslim students...

Today... you only have one fucking reason for the growth of Islam...

 

[Sunni Man]

Mohammed later became a success in Medina.....but only via politics and jihad...expanding his religion by the sword...but this history is not typically taught to muslim students...

Incorrect

All muslims know the complete story of Muhammad.

Heck, it's basically outlined in the Quran.

And how the people of Mecca welcomed him with cheers and open arms.


It's what ever Islamophobic you go to for information that doesn't teach you anything but nonsense and outright lies about Muhammad, muslims, and Islam.

 

[JenT]

Straight from the web site "Islam-Watch"

They try to make Muhammad into some kind of failure in his ministry.

Yet there are 1.5 billion muslims (25% of the world)

I wonder if Christianity would be more successful if we killed everyone that tried to leave, or killed anyone that dared say a word against Jesus.

But then we'd have a religion applauded by satan and the opposite of what Christ was about.

Success isn't always measured in numbers, it's our eternal destination that counts. Everyone will be going in one direction or the other, Christ is the way, the truth and the life.