What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Demystifying Shariah Law: What It Is, & Why It's Not Taking Over USA...we need anti-Islamophobia education in the wake of Rezwan Kohistani's lynching

Uranus

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2022
Messages
484
Reaction score
109
Points
153
Muslims stone both gays and women to death ---by religious decree
The Islamic law — just like the law everywhere else — punishes men and women for the same crimes the same way. Stoning is a punishment for men and women for certain crimes committed.
 

Big Bend Texas

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2022
Messages
9,251
Reaction score
5,151
Points
893
Wrong.
Islam ended much of the local tribal violence in the Mideast by unifying the small tribes together under a larger abstraction.
The violence that came later after Mohammad was dead, was due to Mongols, Moghuls, and Turks invading, massacring Moslem authority, and taking over, pretending to be Moslems.
Then of course there are the Crusades, which are Europeans pretending to be Christians so they can wage wars of aggression.
Resulting in the first major war between continents.
 

Big Bend Texas

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2022
Messages
9,251
Reaction score
5,151
Points
893
There is no such a punishment in Islam as rape or torture. Murder as a legal punishment is the capital punishment, which the US also applies.

One isn't punished for failing to follow "recommendations", but for crimes, just like everywhere else in the world.

Stoning is to death — it is a capital punishment.
Murder is the UNLAWFUL taking of a human life. Capital Punishment cannot be therefore murder.
 

Uranus

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2022
Messages
484
Reaction score
109
Points
153
And in fact, Mohammad was quite clear that he said Judaism and Christianity were equally valid religions to Islam.
Where is that from?

"And whoever desires other than Islam as religion - never will it be accepted from him, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers." Quran 3:85
 

Big Bend Texas

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2022
Messages
9,251
Reaction score
5,151
Points
893
Except there are no real Muslim countries.
The traditions in those Mideast countries predate Islam, and the Asiatic invaders later, like the Mongols, Moghuls, and Turks, totally subverted what the Quran says.
You are once again fabricating bullshit at an amazing rate.

There was no judicial stoning for example in Iraq or Syria until the Islamic State started taking over large swats of both countries.
 

Big Bend Texas

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2022
Messages
9,251
Reaction score
5,151
Points
893
Honor killings are from the Old Testament, so are Judaism, not Sharia or in the Quran.
The Quran and Mohammad were quite clear that Jews and Christians were not to be harmed in any way, much less murdered.
It is a strict religion for my tastes, but not at all intolerant of other religions.
Then explain why the Caliphates murdered millions across N. Africa, the ME and Southern Europe in the name of Allah.
 

Big Bend Texas

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2022
Messages
9,251
Reaction score
5,151
Points
893
Wrong.
Islam ended much of the local tribal violence in the Mideast by unifying the small tribes together under a larger abstraction.
The violence that came later after Mohammad was dead, was due to Mongols, Moghuls, and Turks invading, massacring Moslem authority, and taking over, pretending to be Moslems.
Then of course there are the Crusades, which are Europeans pretending to be Christians so they can wage wars of aggression.
I'm pretty sure that the taking by force of most of the Mediterranean countries including Jerusalem is what led to the Crusades.

The First Crusade was specifically to win back Jerusalem from Muslim invaders.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
23,688
Reaction score
7,460
Points
265
Location
New Mexico
Except that it is and is practiced in quite a few Muslim Countries.


Don't just put up a link.
Quote what you consider the pertinent section, and then give an argument.
The problem is you links is propaganda, that is misstating reality.

Here is an example where the link says:
{...
“It is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible, and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory.”
,,,}
The reason the link takes that quote out of context is that is lying by trying to claim the Quran says lying is ok.
And that is not at all what it is saying.
It is saying that lying is always bad, but that sometime you have to lie in order to prevent harm to others.
The actual quote context is explaining that is it similar to lying when the Gestapo burst in and demands to know where the Jews are hiding.
And obviously the Quran is correct. You should lie in a case like that.
 

Big Bend Texas

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2022
Messages
9,251
Reaction score
5,151
Points
893
Don't just put up a link.
Quote what you consider the pertinent section, and then give an argument.
The problem is you links is propaganda, that is misstating reality.

Here is an example where the link says:
{...
“It is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible, and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory.”
,,,}
The reason the link takes that quote out of context is that is lying by trying to claim the Quran says lying is ok.
And that is not at all what it is saying.
It is saying that lying is always bad, but that sometime you have to lie in order to prevent harm to others.
The actual quote context is explaining that is it similar to lying when the Gestapo burst in and demands to know where the Jews are hiding.
And obviously the Quran is correct. You should lie in a case like that.
Nothing is taken out of context, the source is quoted.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
23,688
Reaction score
7,460
Points
265
Location
New Mexico
Then explain why the Caliphates murdered millions across N. Africa, the ME and Southern Europe in the name of Allah.

That simply is not true.
Islam reduced war, pretty much ending it, and greatly reduced the murders from war.
The problem is that Islam only lasted about 500 years, and then the Asiatic invaders took over the Mideast.
They were the Moslems, Moghuls, and Turks.
And they only pretended to be Islamic.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
23,688
Reaction score
7,460
Points
265
Location
New Mexico
Christianity predates Islam by 600 years and is certainly not incompatible with the US.

Christianity is incompatible with any civilization because it does nothing to feed the starving, heal the sick, prevent slavery, etc.
It preaches a strange passivity that no Christians ever actually follow.
So it really is incompatible even with itself.
 

Big Bend Texas

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2022
Messages
9,251
Reaction score
5,151
Points
893
Christianity is incompatible with any civilization because it does nothing to feed the starving, heal the sick, prevent slavery, etc.
It preaches a strange passivity that no Christians ever actually follow.
So it really is incompatible even with itself.
Pure idiocy. Christianity and the spread of same is responsible for western civilization as we know it today.

No religion can in and of itself cure the sick or feed the hungry, that requires the adherents to practice strange things like, "Christian Charity" which feeds millions across the globe every year and provides vaccinations and other healthcare needs for them free of charge as well.
 

Big Bend Texas

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2022
Messages
9,251
Reaction score
5,151
Points
893
That simply is not true.
Islam reduced war, pretty much ending it, and greatly reduced the murders from war.
The problem is that Islam only lasted about 500 years, and then the Asiatic invaders took over the Mideast.
They were the Moslems, Moghuls, and Turks.
And they only pretended to be Islamic.
What a crock, the only way Muslims ended war was by subjugating the population everywhere it was spread at the point of a sword under Islamic law and murdering millions in the process.
 

Uranus

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2022
Messages
484
Reaction score
109
Points
153
Not true.
Sharia is mostly about rules for marriage, welfare, etc.
The stories about stoning for adultery are not Sharia, but predate Mohammad and come from the Old Testament Judaism.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) ordered stoning as a punishment.

"'Abdullah b. 'Abbas reported that 'Umar b. Khattab sat on the pulpit of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and said:
Verily Allah sent Muhammad (ﷺ) with truth and He sent down the Book upon him, and the verse of stoning was included in what was sent down to him. We recited it, retained it in our memory and understood it. Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) awarded the punishment of stoning to death (to the married adulterer and adulteress) and, after him, we also awarded the punishment of stoning, I am afraid that with the lapse of time, the people (may forget it) And may say: We do not find the punishment of stoning in the Book of Allah, and thus go astray by abandoning this duty prescribed by Allah. Stoning is a duty laid down in Allah's Book for married men and women who commit adultery when proof is established, or it there is pregnancy, or a confession."


 

Billy_Bob

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
27,109
Reaction score
14,642
Points
1,445
Location
Top Of The Great Divide
Through scare tactics and deliberate misinformation campaigns, anti-Muslim propagandists insist wrongly that shariah is a draconian and oppressive Islamic law that all Muslims must abide by. They circulate horror stories, encouraging Americans to fear the “takeover of shariah” law in America and even mounting “anti-shariah protests”…with zero evidence that shariah has taken over any part of our country. (That’s because it hasn’t.) It would be almost funny if it weren’t so terrifyingly wrong – as puzzling as if Americans suddenly began protesting the Martian occupation of Earth.

Shariah is not one set of punitive rules or even law the way we think of law – rigid and enforceable – but religious rules and recommendations that provide Muslims with guidance in various aspects of life.

This is obviously a challenging project, and it's hard to find any links that defend Shariah, so i will include an anti-Shariah link for now

Lets make this easy for you to understand. SHARIA law is both a religion and a government. The US Constitution forbids this from becoming law in the US. Your religion can not be the state.

Murdering a person, in the US, due to their beliefs or nonbelief is not tolerated. Sharai Law does not allow "non-compliance". Take your first century garbage back to the middle east.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
23,688
Reaction score
7,460
Points
265
Location
New Mexico
As a general rule, look at the texts.

In a specific case, look up specific texts:


Traditional jurisprudence[edit]​

Classical/traditional Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) treats homicide as a civil dispute between victim and perpetrator,[9] rather than an act requiring corrective punishment by the state to maintain order.[10] In all cases of murder, unintentional homicide, bodily injury and property damage, under classical/traditional Islamic law, the prosecutor is not the state, but only the victim or the victim's heir (or owner, in the case when the victim is a slave). Qisas can only be demanded by the victim or victim's heirs.[11]

Differences in treatment according to religion and status of victim
In the early history of Islam, there were considerable disagreements in Muslim judicial opinions on applicability of Qisas and Diyya when a Muslim murdered a non-Muslim (Dhimmi, Musta'min or slave).[12][13] (In yet another class were murdered apostates from and blasphemers of Islam, non-Muslims who refused to accept dhimmi status, etc.)

According to classical jurists of three of the four Sunni Islamic schools of jurisprudence -- Shafi'i,[14] Maliki and Hanbali schools -- qisas is available only when the victim is Muslim; while the Hanafi school holds it may apply in some circumstances when a Muslim has done harm to a non-Muslim.[15][16][17]

Jurists agree neither Qisas nor any other form of compensation applied in cases where the victim is

  • an apostate (converted from Islam to another religion),
  • a person who has committed the hadd crime of transgression against Islam or Imam (baghy), or
  • a non-Muslim who did not accept himself or herself as a Dhimmi, or
  • if the non-Muslim victim's family could not prove that the victim used to pay Jizya.[12][18]
Numerous Hanafi, Shafi'i and Maliki jurists stated that a Muslim and a non-Muslim are neither equal nor of same status under sharia, and thus the judicial process and punishment applicable must vary.[19] This was justified by the hadith:[19]



- Wiki

********************
Or you can just go fundie Islam and assume the whole of Sharia and the whole of the Quran are one in the same, absolute list of truths, and pull this one out. The Taliban do it routinely:

Surah 2:191: "And kill them (non-Muslims) wherever you find them … kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers (non-Muslims)."

Surah 9:5: "Then kill the disbelievers (non-Muslims) wherever you find them, capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush …"

Totally WRONG!
The status of Dhimmi is NOT inferior to a Muslim, but is just one who has agreed to follow Islamic law.
Meaning a law abiding citizen.
Paying jizya is NOT a punishment or fine, but equal only to the taxes all Muslims pay at the mosque.
A law abiding Jew or Christian is equal in legal rights and freedoms to any Moslem.

When someone quote a surrah out of context, like Surah 9:5: "Then kill the disbelievers (non-Muslims) wherever you find them, capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush …" they are just deliberately lying.
Because the actual context of Surrah 9:5 is that if another group has betrayed treaties twice before, then if they break them them a third time, you must totally defeat them. The Quran clearly says it is NOT over religion, but because violated treaties a total of 3 times.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
23,688
Reaction score
7,460
Points
265
Location
New Mexico
I'm pretty sure that the taking by force of most of the Mediterranean countries including Jerusalem is what led to the Crusades.

The First Crusade was specifically to win back Jerusalem from Muslim invaders.

Wrong.
Jerusalem had been held by the Romans for centuries, until they finally abandoned it.
Then it slowly became populated by Muslims, without any fighting at all.
Mohammed was around 650 AD.
The first crusade was no until around 1100 AD, and had nothing at all to do with Muslims, who had peacefully occupied Jerusalem for over 500 years.
The Crusades were just totally greedy imperialism, without any justification of any kind.
The only use of force was by the illegal Crusaders.
 

Big Bend Texas

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2022
Messages
9,251
Reaction score
5,151
Points
893
As long as you don't practice it.
Well that's nonsense. Christianity is and always has been the majority religion in the US.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$115.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top