Should europe tolerate islam?

" Answering Opening Post Inquiry "

* I Slam A Phobia *

The term islam is an infinitive meaning " to submit , or submission " and the term muslim means " one who submits " , but the terms are generic such that one may practice islam in a bdsm dungeon by being a muslim to a dominatrix .

There is no such thing as a religion of islam and there is no such thing as a muslim who follows a religion that does not exist , as one who submits to submission is self defining reasoning in circular nonsense .

The literal meaning of the metaphors for an after life , for a chance of eternal life , for reincarnation , for transmutation of soles ,
for being born again , is genetic continuance , where failure to do so , in perpetuity , alludes to metaphors of final judgment and eternal damnation .

Europe should invoke self defense and put fictional ishmaelism on public trial , socially castigating its malevolent history and impugning its supremacist , sectarian , separatist tenets and egregious intentions against individual liberty .

The genetic religion of qurayshism does not apply to the lineages of europe , it does not apply outside of hejaz .

Informed consent is a valued by non aggression principles for obvious advantages .

* Mockery On Megalomania *

Torahnism is a genetic religion for preservation of the patriarchal lineage of eponymous isaac , where the tenets , cultural traditions and city state laws ( 613 mitzvot ) , as proposed in the torah , would only apply within israel .

Qurayshism is a genetic religion for preservation of the patriarchal lineage of eponymous ishmael, where the tenets , cultural traditions and city state laws ( sharia ) , as proposed in the qurayn , would only apply within hejaz .

Any pretense that qurayshism applies outside of hejaz is debase and termed fictional ishmaelism .

The directives to establish the religious polities of torahnism and qurayshism through violence are limited in scope to israel and hejaz ; and , those directives cannot be extricated from the doctrines of foundation ; and , fictional ishmaelism absurdly prefaces that qurayshism is universal and applies everywhere .


* Genetic Religion Hell Hounds Got Loose Poor Farcical Farsi *

The nomianism of fictional ishmaelism is little more than a pretentious supremacy for arab cultural hegemony .

Surah 8:75 - And those who believed after [the initial emigration] and emigrated and fought with you - they are of you. But those of [blood] relationship are more entitled [to inheritance] in the decree of God. Indeed, God is Knowing of all things.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad_Caliphate
The Umayyad caliphate was marked both by territorial expansion and by the administrative and cultural problems that such expansion created. Despite some notable exceptions, the Umayyads tended to favor the rights of the old Arab families, and in particular their own, over those of newly converted Muslims (mawali). Therefore, they held to a less universalist conception of Islam than did many of their rivals. As G.R. Hawting has written, "Islam was in fact regarded as the property of the conquering aristocracy."[74]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasid_Revolution...
The Umayyad state is remembered as an Arab-centric state, being run by and for the benefit of those who were ethnically Arab though Muslim in creed.[11][30] The non-Arab Muslims resented their marginal social position and were easily drawn into Abbasid opposition to Umayyad rule.[13][14][26] Arabs dominated the bureaucracy and military, and were housed in fortresses separate from the local population outside of Arabia.[5] Even after converting to Islam, non-Arabs or Mawali could not live in these garrison cities. The non-Arabs were not allowed to work for the government nor could they hold officer positions in the Umayyad military and they still had to pay the jizya tax for non-Muslims.[30][31][32][33] Non-Muslims under Umayyad rule were subject to these same injunctions.[34] Racial intermarriage between Arabs and non Arabs was rare.[6] When it did occur, it was only allowed between an Arab man and a non-Arab woman while non-Arab men were generally not free to marry Arab women.[7]

Conversion to Islam occurred gradually. If a non-Arab wished to convert to Islam, they not only had to give up their own names but also had to remain a second-class citizen.[12][32] The non-Arab would be "adopted" by an Arab tribe,[33] though they would not actually adopt the tribe's name as that would risk pollution of perceived Arab racial purity. Rather, the non-Arab would take the last name of "freedman of al-(tribe's name)", even if they were not a slave prior to conversion. This essentially meant they were subservient to the tribe who sponsored their conversion.[12][35]


* Antiquated Form From Function *

A Treatise of Legal Philosophy on Adequate Political Science Terms for Civics Pedagogy

" Superfluous Rigor Of Political Approval "
* Open Topic Challenge *

The thread is posted for responses to the following proposition , " Do any tenets of fictional ishmaelism violate non aggression principles ? " .
" Driving On Ward "
* Exceeding Imagination *

It has been prefaced that religion is analogous with creed and that creed may be evaluated apatheistically as to whether a particular tenet of creed qualifies as a threat of , or an act of , illegitimate aggression .
Thus consider this thesis on the antithesis of nomianism versus antinomianism .
Consider a premise for antinomianism that by no name may a law be invoked : not by mu sah ; not by is sa ; not by mu ham mad ; not by pretense from an ineffable deity ; not by john queue politician ; such that all laws are to be removed from social constructs , which represents a logical paradox - both utopian and dystopian .
By presumption , antinomainism is incapable of issuing a retort or reprisal for violating laws which are not noted , albeit antinomianism implies behavior of its adherents be consistent with utopianism .
Thus , a creed for antinomianism would not implement illegitimate aggression through public policy ; albeit , antinomianism is incapable of asserting a retort or reprise against illegitimate aggression , which some may accuse as a public policy for illegitimate aggression by negligence , which is a contradiction , an absurdity .
Thus remains is to propose whether when or where tenets of creed from nomianism bear allegiance to implement illegitimate aggression as public policy .

* Anti Fascist Fascists *

There are those vexed who assert a premise to defend minorities and a premise to be intolerant of the intolerant ; and , another related premise is to remain objective without prejudging ; and , those have bred an affliction of cognitive dissonance justified by willful ignorance surrendering to a responsibility to assess whether a legitimate bias is valid .

There are those who detest and deride memorabilia that represents separatism and supremacy , but the cannot discern that fictional ishmaelism doctrine includes them both and tosses sectarianism atop .

Very simply , antioniomainism is invoked against any pretenses for fictional ishmaelism nomianism ; and , there is not a religious exception for tenet of creed to violate non aggression principles through public policy and those subject to such threats of illegitimate aggression are entitled to invoke an appropriate degree of self defense .
 
Last edited:
I once read http://americanbikersunitedagainstj...mic-deceit-taqiyya-kitman-tawriya-muruna-etc/

And there are several opinions.

One of it that yes, it should.

Let the muslims believe whatever they want to believe. It's their right. France would stop becoming a free society if it starts meddling with others' people' opinion.

I partially agree with it.

The problem is, France, is a democratic country. The opinions of your fellow citizens will affect how you live.

Imagine if suddenly a large number of people wants to prohibit porn or to stone porn stars. It will be the law of the land.

Another issue is consistency. If germany or france tolerate islam, should they also tolerate nazism and white supremacism? Same logic. If you tolerate one and not the other, you're in the same shit.

What happens is we have an imbalanced secularism. A violent ideology end up being protected because their adherence simply complain too much about how they are being oppressed. A more moderate ideology, like capitalism, is freely attacked and ridiculed.

So what do you think?

Sure! Accept Islam is they want to destroy themselves!
 
3 choices

1. Tolerate consistently. Tolerate islam and islamophobia equally
2. Bent over backward
3. Prohibit (like europe prohibit nazi and drug)

I have no idea which way is a good idea.

You may want to notice that some islamic countries have lower murder rate and lower robbery rate. The muslims are often diligent. However, they tend to vote for higher redistribution of wealth and bigger government. They're conservative socially and liberal economically. Hence, the opposite of libertarian.

My suggestion is each country should try their own approach and always mind your own interests. Let's see which works.

If things that are discriminatory turns out profitable for our interests we will have interesting discussions.

Many muslims will not want to vote for non muslim leaders. Ahok in Indonesia is jailed for saying people are being lied to. Jakarta governor Ahok sentenced to two years in prison for blasphemy

I will definitely not hire that kind of muslims.

In general I do not like people that are loyal to religious leaders instead of to me, when hiring. I pay well, I want people to be loyal to me.
 
" Separatist Sectarian Supremacist Intolerant Bigots Proselytizing Nomian Hubris "

* Rabidity Deserving Trophy For Greatest Number Of Homicides In History Attributable To An Ideology *

1. Tolerate consistently. Tolerate islam and islamophobia equally

#I_SLAM_A_PHOBIA is the paranoia and delusion of fictional ishmaelism invoked from surah 9 for over 1400 years to defend hejaz through unprovoked aggression when it was not ever under duress .

Undoubtedly , at less than 2% of the us population , their banter is already loud mouth , obnoxious and domineering , with seemingly every other internet article posted at " we will take any money for words " news outlet as some propaganda piece to normalize fictional ishmaelism .

Jst imagine how obnoxious and domineering politics would be if a statistical majority , or formidable majority , of fictional ishmaelism was to be established , as it does not engage in apologetics and lives by the creed of surah 47:35 " So do not weaken and call for peace while you are superior .. " .

The news articles are funded by the saudi terrorists slush fund ( 100s of billions spent ) on behalf of any sail a fists or mussel men bother hood ; and , congress is somehow worried about russians , when the saudi lobby overwhelm congressional opinion , when the saudi propaganda machine seeks to overwhelm public opinion and public policy .
 
Last edited:
3 choices

1. Tolerate consistently. Tolerate islam and islamophobia equally
2. Bent over backward
3. Prohibit (like europe prohibit nazi and drug)

I have no idea which way is a good idea.

You may want to notice that some islamic countries have lower murder rate and lower robbery rate. The muslims are often diligent. However, they tend to vote for higher redistribution of wealth and bigger government. They're conservative socially and liberal economically. Hence, the opposite of libertarian.

My suggestion is each country should try their own approach and always mind your own interests. Let's see which works.

If things that are discriminatory turns out profitable for our interests we will have interesting discussions.

Many muslims will not want to vote for non muslim leaders. Ahok in Indonesia is jailed for saying people are being lied to. Jakarta governor Ahok sentenced to two years in prison for blasphemy

I will definitely not hire that kind of muslims.

In general I do not like people that are loyal to religious leaders instead of to me, when hiring. I pay well, I want people to be loyal to me.
Japan doesn't allow the koran to be imported and sold there. Muslims aren't allowed to get citizenship there either. Mosques are banned... Sounds like a plan to me.
 
While there are many things that I disagree, there are some positive aspects too. I've heard some muslims do not like thieves and would fought robbers. They are more likely to do so. Many western countries are crime ridden.

You do not need islam to have high crime rate in your country. Being liberal to thieves would do that too.
 
" Keeping It Simple "

* Expositions Of Covert Motives With Magnanimous Body Counts *

While there are many things that I disagree, there are some positive aspects too. I've heard some muslims do not like thieves and would fought robbers. They are more likely to do so. Many western countries are crime ridden.
You do not need islam to have high crime rate in your country. Being liberal to thieves would do that too.
Thievery violates non aggression principles and one need not invoke the nomianism from a genetic religion that only applies within the city state of hejaz to establish that otherwise .

The unprovoked aggression for imperialism , for iconoclasm , for institutionalized enslavement , for brigandage , for homicide by fictional ishmaelism that has occurred during its approximate 1400 years of existence should be exposed and publicly castigated .

The principles of antinomianism and non aggression principles are to be forwarded over debase pretenses of fictional ishmaelism that the nomianism from the genetic religion of qurayshism applies outside of the city state known as hejaz , as " the barrier " .

* Offering Wisely Terms *

A Treatise of Legal Philosophy on Adequate Political Science Terms for Civics Pedagogy
 
Europe should tolerate islam as far as islam will tolerate unhampered Christian witnessing among them concerning Our LORD JESUS CHRIST.
 

Forum List

Back
Top