Moderate vs. Fundamentalist Islam

[Si modo]

Separation and/or divorce seems like a much more rational option, at least here in the USA, but that's just me, I guess.

 

[MaggieMae]

At least she didn't cut his dick off. That's a real problem in some cultures.

I believe it's called "Bobbitism" in America.

 

[Fatality]

NEW YORK — A devout Muslim woman told police she slashed her husband's neck with a kitchen knife as he slept because he forced her to eat pork, wear short skirts and drink alcohol in violation of her religious beliefs.

Rabia Sarwar, 37, pleaded not guilty to attempted murder and was freed on $25,000 bail. She told police in a written statement that she was emotionally abused by her husband, Seikh Naseem.

"He made me do so many things that are against Islam," she wrote in a statement to police.

"I did all that just to make him happy but inside me there was a war," she continued.

Naseem suffered cuts to his neck, cheek and hand early Wednesday before fighting Sarwar off and dialing 911 from his Staten Island home, authorities said.

"I did my best to cut his throat," Rabia Sarwar wrote. "But the next moment he jumped on me and grabbed me."

Read more at: Rabia Sarwar Tried To Slit Husband Sheikh Naseem's Throat For Making Her Eat Pork, Wear Short Skirts

Good for her.

so what the fuck else is old? oh, yeah mohammadans comitting violence and terrorism because of thier religion, and liberals supporting it. yeah, thats old too.

 

[MaggieMae]

There may be moderate muslims, more than likely they are just posing , Trojan horses for fundamentalism, there is no moderate Islam.

I thought the definition of a moderate Muslim was an Arab who was out of ammunition.

If Islam really wanted to stop terrorism all it would take would be a campaign to clearly state that terrorism is wrong, terrorists are criminals, and suicide bombers that kill don't get 76-virgins, they get hell.

Since Islam doesn't stop terrorism, one must conclude that Islam condones and supports it. So tell me again why we let them in the US??

There are many Muslim groups who try to teach peaceful Islam, and try to reverse the damage done by the fundamentalists. But it isn't easy when the militant groups who brainwash the uneducated and dirt poor, mainly teenagers, promise their lives will be richer if they fight the "infidels," their recruiting is more successful.

 

[Fatality]

I thought the definition of a moderate Muslim was an Arab who was out of ammunition.

If Islam really wanted to stop terrorism all it would take would be a campaign to clearly state that terrorism is wrong, terrorists are criminals, and suicide bombers that kill don't get 76-virgins, they get hell.

Since Islam doesn't stop terrorism, one must conclude that Islam condones and supports it. So tell me again why we let them in the US??

There are many Muslim groups who try to teach peaceful Islam, and try to reverse the damage done by the fundamentalists. But it isn't easy when the militant groups who brainwash the uneducated and dirt poor, mainly teenagers, promise their lives will be richer if they fight the "infidels," their recruiting is more successful.

plus they have people like you who support their violence

 

[MaggieMae]

If Islam really wanted to stop terrorism all it would take would be a campaign to clearly state that terrorism is wrong, terrorists are criminals, and suicide bombers that kill don't get 76-virgins, they get hell.

Since Islam doesn't stop terrorism, one must conclude that Islam condones and supports it. So tell me again why we let them in the US??

There are many Muslim groups who try to teach peaceful Islam, and try to reverse the damage done by the fundamentalists. But it isn't easy when the militant groups who brainwash the uneducated and dirt poor, mainly teenagers, promise their lives will be richer if they fight the "infidels," their recruiting is more successful.

plus they have people like you who support their violence

And where did you get that, moron?

 

[WillowTree]

PoliticalChic's thread title is very misleading.

This isn't about political differences in Islam.

It's about domestic and spouse abuse which takes place in every culture reguardless of religion.

Nothing here to see......so I'll just move on

except in the woman's own words she did it because he made her do things outside her religious beliefs, so don't try to bullshit the troops, it's all about religion.

 

[Fatality]

There are many Muslim groups who try to teach peaceful Islam, and try to reverse the damage done by the fundamentalists. But it isn't easy when the militant groups who brainwash the uneducated and dirt poor, mainly teenagers, promise their lives will be richer if they fight the "infidels," their recruiting is more successful.

plus they have people like you who support their violence

And where did you get that, moron?

from right here, moron!

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1667153-post19.html

 

[Fatality]

PoliticalChic's thread title is very misleading.

This isn't about political differences in Islam.

It's about domestic and spouse abuse which takes place in every culture reguardless of religion.

Nothing here to see......so I'll just move on

except in the woman's own words she did it because he made her do things outside her religious beliefs, so don't try to bullshit the troops, it's all about religion.

damn straight it is, right out of her own mouth.

 

[Kalam]

Was the OP planning on putting forth an argument?

 

[PoliticalChic]

plus they have people like you who support their violence

And where did you get that, moron?

from right here, moron!

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1667153-post19.html

I have to jump in to support M & M - because it's Holloween.

I think that she was simply casting a vote for feminism, rather than violence.

Left tho' she may be, she is not rabid.

Nor a moron.

 

[The T]

There may be moderate muslims, more than likely they are just posing , Trojan horses for fundamentalism, there is no moderate Islam.

Yep. People like to equate the word 'Moderate' into everything. In this case you either subscribe to the Koran, or you don't.

Thinking there are 'Moderate'Muslims' is wishful thinking. And to those that think they are 'Moderate' in their faith should get out of it...even under 'Pain of DEATH' advocated by the Koran for changing Religion.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Was the OP planning on putting forth an argument?

I posted the item because, noir tho' it may be, it struck me as funny.

Also, I augmented my thoughts a few items after the OP.

On the other hand, if you flesh out your critique, I'd be happy to engage.

 

[Kalam]

even under 'Pain of DEATH' advocated by the Koran for changing Religion.

Per which verse?

 

[Kalam]

Was the OP planning on putting forth an argument?

I posted the item because, noir tho' it may be, it struck me as funny.

Also, I augmented my thoughts a few items after the OP.

On the other hand, if you flesh out your critique, I'd be happy to engage.

My critique of what? If you're attempting to draw conclusions about a fifth of the world's population based on that incident, no criticism from me is necessary.

 

[PoliticalChic]

There may be moderate muslims, more than likely they are just posing , Trojan horses for fundamentalism, there is no moderate Islam.

Yep. People like to equate the word 'Moderate' into everything. In this case you either subscribe to the Koran, or you don't.

Thinking there are 'Moderate'Muslims' is wishful thinking. And to those that think they are 'Moderate' in their faith should get out of it...even under 'Pain of DEATH' advocated by the Koran for changing Religion.

OMG, I can't believe the position I'm being force into.

No, more than a passing visit to the Koran will show that there are numerous passages, suras, that can be read as modeate, and, as with every religion, the outcome depends on which aspects, suras, one emphsizes.

Although there are far too many fundamentalists, wahhabists, the number of Muslims in the world relative to the evil deeds, implies that not all subscribe to the most extreme aspects.

There can be moderate Islam. Just not today.

 

[PoliticalChic]

even under 'Pain of DEATH' advocated by the Koran for changing Religion.

Per which verse?

Punishment by death for apostasy from Islam is firmly rooted in the most holy Muslim texts -- both the Koran (verses such as 2:217 and 4:89) and the hadith (i.e., collections of the putative words and deeds of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, as compiled by pious Muslim transmitters), as well as the sacred Islamic Law (the Shari'a). For example, Muhammad is reported to have said "Kill him who changes his religion," in hadith collections of both Bukhari and Abu Dawud. There is also a consensus by all four schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (i.e., Maliki, Hanbali, Hanafi, and Shafi'i), as well as Shi'ite jurists, that apostates from Islam must be put to death. Averroes (d. 1198), the renowned philosopher and scholar of the natural sciences, who was also an important Maliki jurist, provided this typical Muslim legal opinion on the punishment for apostasy:


"An apostate...is to be executed by agreement in the case of a man, because of the words of the Prophet, ‘Slay those who change their din [religion]'...Asking the apostate to repent was stipulated as a condition...prior to his execution."

The contemporary (i.e., 1991) Al-Azhar (Cairo) Islamic Research Academy-endorsed Shafi'i manual of Islamic Law, 'Umdat al-Salik (pp. 595-96) states:


"Leaving Islam is the ugliest form of unbelief (kufr) and the worst.... When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostasizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed. In such a case, it is obligatory...to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed."

The media's ignorance (or denial) of relevant Islamic jurisprudence on apostasy is compounded by its obliviousness to public pronouncements by North American Muslim legal scholars and clerics urging draconian punishments for Muslims who renounce Islam in Canada, or the US.

Syed Mumtaz Ali, the late architect of Canada's Sharia (Islamic Law) tribunal, and law professor Ali Khan, for example both advocated extending Islamic apostasy laws to the West. Mumtaz Ali, in a disturbing essay, affirmed the traditional Islamic legal viewpoint that apostates must "choose between Islam and the sword," arguing further that if Canada were to act in accord with its own Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Canadian government must grant the country's Islamic community authority to punish those Muslims who apostasize, or malign their faith.

Washburn (Topeka, Kansas) University Law Professor, Ali Khan, another practicing Muslim, provided a more original, but no less chilling rationale for Muslims in the West to violate -- fatally -- the basic freedom of conscience of their co-religionists. Khan argued in The Cumberland Law Review that apostasy from Islam is an "attack" upon "protected knowledge," which if deemed (i.e., by some Islamic tribunal one must assume!) to be "open, hostile, and voiced contemptuously," justified punishment by death. Ali Khan is convinced that traditional Islamic law precepts antithetical to freedom of conscience nevertheless trump this foundational Western freedom, because,


"Islam is the truth beyond doubt. [And] [t] hese rules preserve the dignity of protected knowledge, discouraging an ‘easy in, easy out' attitude toward Islam."
American Thinker: Killing Rifqa

 

[PoliticalChic]

Was the OP planning on putting forth an argument?

I posted the item because, noir tho' it may be, it struck me as funny.

Also, I augmented my thoughts a few items after the OP.

On the other hand, if you flesh out your critique, I'd be happy to engage.

My critique of what? If you're attempting to draw conclusions about a fifth of the world's population based on that incident, no criticism from me is necessary.

No, not an argument.

Perchance if you read the entire thread, you will see the basis for the posting.

But I see a chip that I'm more than willing to knock off.

 

[Kalam]

You don't remember posting that earlier? You failed to put forth any meaningful response to my rebuttal, so I assumed that my argument stood.

Let's look into this.

Punishment by death for apostasy from Islam is firmly rooted in the most holy Muslim texts -- both the Koran (verses such as 2:217 and 4:89)

They ask thee about fighting in the sacred month. Say: fighting it is a grave (offense). And hindering from Allah's way and denying Him and the Sacred Mosque and turning its people out of it, are still graver with Allah; and persecution is graver with Allah; and persecution (fitna - persecution, trial, etc.) is graver than slaughter. And they will not cease fighting you until they turn you back from your religion, if they can. And whoever of you turns back from his religion, then he dies while an unbeliever -- these it is whose works go for nothing in this world and the Hereafter. And they are the companions of the Fire: therein they will abide. - 2:217​

This ayah condemns those who attempt to proselytize Muslims and who prevent them from worshiping freely in the Masjid al-Haram. Moreover, it's made clear that the disbelievers being referenced are "fighting" Muslims with the intent of making them convert to another religion. Of those who abandon Islam, it is said that anything that they may accomplish is nullified in the sight of Allah (SWT) and that they'll receive their due punishment in the hereafter. No earthly punishment is prescribed, so the claim that this ayah provides justification for executing apostates is dishonest and inaccurate. The next ayah you cite proves my point rather than yours. Let's read it along with the ayah that immediately follows it:

They long that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved so that you might be on the same level; so take not from among them friends until they flee in Allah’s way. Then if they turn back, seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take no friend nor helper from among them, except those who join a people between whom and you there is an alliance, or who come to you, their hearts shrinking from fighting you or fighting their own people. And if Allah had pleased, He would have given them power over you, so that they would have fought you. So if they withdraw from you and fight you not and offer you peace, then Allah allows you no way against them. - 4:89-90​

The passage hardly requires an explanation. If the person in question "withdraws" from the Muslims (ie: becomes an apostate), attacking him is not permissible unless he takes up arms against Muslims.

and the hadith (i.e., collections of the putative words and deeds of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, as compiled by pious Muslim transmitters),

Narrated Jabir: A bedouin came to the Prophet and said, "Please take my Pledge of allegiance for Islam." So the Prophet took from him the Pledge of allegiance for Islam. He came the next day with a fever and said to the Prophet "Cancel my pledge." But the Prophet refused and when the bedouin went away (from Madinah,) the Prophet said, "Madinah is like a pair of bellows: It expels its impurities and brightens and clears its good."

- Sahih Bukhari, Ahkaam ("Judgements"), no. 323.​

The same hadith is reported in nos. 316 and 318 of that book as well as no. 107 of Virtues of Madinah and no. 424 of Holding Fast to the Quran and Sunnah.


More:
Is Apostasy a Capital Crime in Islam? - IslamOnline.net - Living Sharia'h


Sharia is derived from the Qur'an and Ahadith. Law with no firm basis in scripture is not Sharia.


See the link above.


This is untrue. The Shafi'i Grand Mufti, Ali Gomaa, does not believe that apostasy is a capital offense under Islam.

Ali Gomaa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Nope. Grand Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri disagrees.

Hosein-Ali Montazeri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Averroes (d. 1198), the renowned philosopher and scholar of the natural sciences, who was also an important Maliki jurist, provided this typical Muslim legal opinion on the punishment for apostasy

The Middle Ages were a period of particularly high intolerance in Islam. A legal opinion issued during that period was not necessarily reflective of the actual teachings of the religion.

The contemporary (i.e., 1991) Al-Azhar (Cairo) Islamic Research Academy-endorsed Shafi'i manual of Islamic Law, 'Umdat al-Salik (pp. 595-96) states:

Reliance of the Traveler is not contemporary; it was written by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri (d. 1367 CE.) You're referring to the 1990 translation of that work by Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller. The Shafi'i position on apostasy was articulated by Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa; see above.

You'll forgive me for not addressing the rest of the post, as it deals with individuals whose opinions hold no real weight in Islam.

Wa 'alaykum as-salam.

 

[Kalam]

No, not an argument.

Perchance if you read the entire thread, you will see the basis for the posting.

Were you referring to your support for attempted murder? Or, perhaps, one of your funny, funny jokes?

I thought the definition of a moderate Muslim was an Arab who was out of ammunition.

You must have missed the bulletin.

Terrorism is over since they re-interpreted the phrase as either 72-raisins, or a 7 foot Persian.