Just your average day of "peaceful Islam"...

[YWN666]

and again and again you dodge the question and utterly ignore the points being made.

meh.

I'm done wasting time on you.

What question is that? You believe Shariah should not be banned because Muslims will get upset. That's pretty clear, and evident as to who's side you're on. Most Americans however, disagree and think Shariah is backwards, barbaric, oppressive, bigoted, anti humanity, anti freedom, anti democracy, anti American, anti women, and intolerant.

I thought we were done 10 pages ago.

If a Muslim wants to live by Sharia in his own personal life I could care less however I don't want Sharia ANYWHERE in American legislation, its incompatible with our way of life.

NO religious rules should be legislated, Muslim or otherwise.

 

[Hollie]

Meanwhile, in the alternate reality of the islamo-universe:


Iraq: Triple bombing at market near Baghdad kills 23, wounds 40 - Indian Express Mobile


Iraq: Triple bombing at market near Baghdad kills 23, wounds 40.

Bombs ripped through outdoor markets in and near Baghdad on Thursday, killing at least 23 people and wounding dozens, the latest in a deadly wave that has hit Iraq in recent months, officials said.

Three bombs went off simultaneously in the Shiite village of Sabaa al-Bour, about 30 kilometres north of the Iraqi capital.

The Sunni and Shia despise each other. The reason for innocent civilians being sploded’ at mosques and in street markets is fundamentally an issue of religious hatreds. Those hatreds are founded in a religious blood feud that dates back to early Islamist times and tales.

They blow up each others mosques because the visceral hatred they have for each other is the continuation of this 1,400 year old blood feud that is not going to be resolved anytime soon. These hatreds are always smoldering just under the surface and frequently erupt into raging bonfires of death and destruction. We see this in Iraq where sunni and shia frequently target each others mosques and markets. In particular, these locations are target rich environments where people gather. They are also symbols of oppression for the competing sect/tribe. The routine street murders are decidedly low yield in comparison to a car filled with two hundred pounds of explosives driven into a mosque courtyard or shopping area.

 

[Uncensored2008]

blah blah blah blah

And in the end - what have you proved?

Not much.

There wasn't a person on the board that didn't already know that your were an apologist for radical Islam.

1. You never read your own source
2. You can't refute (with facts) what your own source said - your just spinning in place
3. Meh - this thread has become a cess for bigots.

I accept that you got your ass handed to you, but lack the class to bow out gracefully.

 

[Roudy]

and again and again you dodge the question and utterly ignore the points being made.

meh.

I'm done wasting time on you.

What question is that? You believe Shariah should not be banned because Muslims will get upset. That's pretty clear, and evident as to who's side you're on. Most Americans however, disagree and think Shariah is backwards, barbaric, oppressive, bigoted, anti humanity, anti freedom, anti democracy, anti American, anti women, and intolerant.

I thought we were done 10 pages ago.

If a Muslim wants to live by Sharia in his own personal life I could care less however I don't want Sharia ANYWHERE in American legislation, its incompatible with our way of life.

In fact it is the INTOLERANCE AND HATE IN SHARIAH INGRAINED IN THE MUSLIM MIND TOWARDS THE NON MUSLIM that causes Muslims to murder and terrorize Christians and Jews in Muslim lands.

Ya sure, let's let them import that medieval garbage, and allow them to continue the barbarism here.

 

[Roudy]

What question is that? You believe Shariah should not be banned because Muslims will get upset. That's pretty clear, and evident as to who's side you're on. Most Americans however, disagree and think Shariah is backwards, barbaric, oppressive, bigoted, anti humanity, anti freedom, anti democracy, anti American, anti women, and intolerant.

I thought we were done 10 pages ago.

If a Muslim wants to live by Sharia in his own personal life I could care less however I don't want Sharia ANYWHERE in American legislation, its incompatible with our way of life.

NO religious rules should be legislated, Muslim or otherwise.

Shariah does not believe in separation of church and state. Those who disagree must be killed.

 

[Truthseeker420]

Just your average day of "peaceful Islam"...

Muslims blow up a Christian church in Pakistan killing more than 100 people who have done nothing wrong other than practice a religion other than Islam.

Muslims attack a mall in Kenya, killing over 80 non Muslims and counting. Running around like wild animals asking innocent shoppers taken as hostages if they are Muslims, and if so to prove it by reciting prayers, before they murder them.

Oh wait, "all religions have fanatics", right? RIIIIIIIIIGHT. <snicker>

Better yet, "Islam is not at war with us", WE ARE AT WAR WITH ISLAM, right?

It's all our fault, WE MADE THEM DO IT.

Don't worry were way ahead on the killing of brown people.

 

[Coyote]

What question is that? You believe Shariah should not be banned because Muslims will get upset. That's pretty clear, and evident as to who's side you're on. Most Americans however, disagree and think Shariah is backwards, barbaric, oppressive, bigoted, anti humanity, anti freedom, anti democracy, anti American, anti women, and intolerant.

I thought we were done 10 pages ago.

1. Roudy, I don't give a **** if Muslims "get upset". I oppose religious discrimination of ANY KIND. Is that really so hard to comprehend? I oppose legislation that singles out one religion. I oppose senseless legislation designed to address non-existent problems and designed only for one thing - to discriminate against a particular religion.

2. If you think it's so "abundantly clear" then consider this. Mosaic law - the law that Jews follow - is barbaric, oppressive, bigoted, anti humanity, anti freedom, anti democracy, anti American, anti women, and intolerant and frankly ludicrous if followed to it's letter. Why aren't you supporting a ban on that? You realize Sharia also involves things as simple as Halal -so, you would make that illegal? Should Kosher be illegal?

3. The only argument you are able to make here is a default attack- "you support Sharia" which is an utter strawman. That's like saying a person supports the KKK because they support the right of the KKK to free speech.

4. I trust and support our system of government - it has withstood the test of time and tyrants and religion. Our people - of all religions - support the constitution and values enshrined. Many or our people have immigrated from countries that were overwhelmingly oppressive and restrictive and hardly want a return to that.

5. We have a overwhelmingly Christian majority, including a sizable politically active fundamentalist element that has for years tried to legislate religion into law and failed. What on earth makes you think an insignificantly small Muslim minority could force Sharia EVEN if they wanted to?

6. Clearly you do not trust our system and clearly you do not believe in our values of freedom of religion - constitutionally protected rights that enable YOU to practice your faith without discrimination and ME to practice my faith without discrimination. I stand behind those values 100% and I stand behind the rights and laws we have that prevent discrimination based on race, religion, ethnicity and sexual orientation.

Do you?

1. Sure, that would apply to this discussion in what way, exactly? Instead of answering him, you attack Christian teachings in the paragraph below...

We were talking about anti-Sharia legislation in the United States. I thought that was clear.

2. Speaking of religious tolerance...

Woah dude. Explain to me how making a comparison is "religious intolerance". Are you familiar with Mosaic law? It's highly detailed, archaic, intolerant and brutal. Sharia springs from it and both were designed for a society that existed over a thousand years ago.

So - how is this "religious intolerance"?

3. A red herring.

Excuse me? How exactly?

4. Such blind faith in the government is dangerous. People with similar faith in the government have been tragically let down. I dub them 'Liberals'

It's not blind faith in the government - it's faith in our constitution and system of law. Over 200 years of history stand behind it.

5. What good is a Christian majority in an overly secular government? Where have you been the past 5 years?

That is precisely the point.

6. It's a no brainer why he doesn't trust the system. But then again, you claim we are a Christian majority, but would you stand to defend one if he chose to express his faith? Or is this defense of religious freedom a selective thing for you?

Yes I would - I treat it the same as any other religion. Why would you think differently?

 

[Coyote]

blah blah blah blah

And in the end - what have you proved?

Not much.

There wasn't a person on the board that didn't already know that your were an apologist for radical Islam.

1. You never read your own source
2. You can't refute (with facts) what your own source said - your just spinning in place
3. Meh - this thread has become a cess for bigots.

I accept that you got your ass handed to you, but lack the class to bow out gracefully.

So you never read your own source and you can't even address the points it made?

No wonder you resort to name calling.

 

[Coyote]

What question is that? You believe Shariah should not be banned because Muslims will get upset. That's pretty clear, and evident as to who's side you're on. Most Americans however, disagree and think Shariah is backwards, barbaric, oppressive, bigoted, anti humanity, anti freedom, anti democracy, anti American, anti women, and intolerant.

I thought we were done 10 pages ago.

If a Muslim wants to live by Sharia in his own personal life I could care less however I don't want Sharia ANYWHERE in American legislation, its incompatible with our way of life.

NO religious rules should be legislated, Muslim or otherwise.

If the anti-Sharia bills made it all religious law, I would not object as much - at least it wouldn't be discrimminatory. It would still be retarded though because it's unnecessary - our Constitution already provides for a seperation of religion and state.

The cases where any kinds of religious law are used are in situations such as recognizing transacations that occurred in a foreign country (for example divorce or contracts) and that country's laws are based on a religion - we recognize it. Other situations are arbritation and family courts where it's voluntary and recourse is available to standard law.

 

[YWN666]

If a Muslim wants to live by Sharia in his own personal life I could care less however I don't want Sharia ANYWHERE in American legislation, its incompatible with our way of life.

NO religious rules should be legislated, Muslim or otherwise.

Shariah does not believe in separation of church and state. Those who disagree must be killed.

I don't see anyone trying to legislate sharia law in the US, do you? Even if they do try, they won't get very far.

 

[Coyote]

NO religious rules should be legislated, Muslim or otherwise.

Shariah does not believe in separation of church and state. Those who disagree must be killed.

I don't see anyone trying to legislate sharia law in the US, do you? Even if they do try, they won't get very far.

Exactly - there is no desire for it and sheesh - if even the Christian majority, trying for ages - can't get any form of religious law instituted why would people think Muslims could?

 

[Roudy]

All said while totally ignoring the fact that it is because of the intolerance and hatred in shariah law that Muslims go around bombing and murdering infidels in their countries. Yup, no reason to ban it. Let them import this hate right here on our soil.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I don't see anyone trying to legislate sharia law in the US, do you? Even if they do try, they won't get very far.

Ohhh, a straw man.

How clever...

 

[Roudy]

Islam apologist / Shariah lover:

Are you familiar with Mosaic law? It's highly detailed, archaic, intolerant and brutal...

Again, more bullshit, ignorance, and false comparisons by the Islam apologist. Mosaic "law" is simply a description of how to practice the religion, thousands of years ago. With zero relevance to Shariah law today.

Mosaic covenant - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Mosaic Covenant (named after Moses), also known as the Sinaitic Covenant (named after the biblical Mount Sinai), refers to a biblical covenant between God and the biblical Israelites, including their proselytes.[1][2] The establishment and stipulations of the Mosaic Covenant are recorded in the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, which are traditionally attributed to Mosaic authorship and collectively called the Torah, and this covenant is sometimes also referred to as the Law of Moses or Mosaic Law or the 613 Mitzvot.

In the Hebrew Bible, God established the Mosaic Covenant with the Israelites after he saved them from slavery in Egypt in the events of the Exodus. From it is derived the 613 commandments.
The Mosaic Covenant played a role in defining the Israelite kingdom (c.1220-c.930 BCE), and subsequently the southern Kingdom of Judah (c.930-c.587 BCE) and northern Kingdom of Israel (c.930-c.720 BCE), and Yehud Medinata (c.539-c.333 BCE), and the Hasmonean Kingdom (140-37 BCE), and the Bar Kokhba revolt (132-136 CE)

Main article: Christian views on the Old Covenant


A depiction of the famous Sermon on the Mount of Jesus in which he commented on the Old Covenant. Christians believe that Jesus is the mediator of the New Covenant.[4] Painting by Carl Heinrich Bloch, Danish painter, d. 1890.
The Mosaic Covenant, which Christians generally call the "Old Covenant", in contrast to the New Covenant, has played an important role in the shaping of Christianity and been the source of serious dispute and controversy since its inception, such as Jesus' expounding of the Law during his Sermon on the Mount, the circumcision controversy in Early Christianity, and the Incident at Antioch which has led scholars to dispute the relationship between Paul of Tarsus and Judaism. The Book of Acts recorded that after the ascension of Jesus, that as the first Christian martyr Stephen was killed in a controversy over which he was accused of speaking against the temple and the Mosaic Law, Act 6:8-14. Later, in Acts 15:1-21, the Council of Jerusalem addressed the circumcision controversy in early Christianity.
See also

 

[Roudy]

I don't see anyone trying to legislate sharia law in the US, do you? Even if they do try, they won't get very far.

Ohhh, a straw man.

How clever...

That's what they do. The jump like butterflies of diversion, comparing Islam to Judaism, then Christianity, then Hinduism, and back and forth.

All the while, making it more that obvious, THERE IS NO COMPARISON.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So you never read your own source and you can't even address the points it made?

Last I checked, the whole "have you quit beating your wife" routine was not only a logical fallacy, but the sign of a weak intellect.

No wonder you resort to name calling.

Oh, and what name did I call you?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Don't worry were way ahead on the killing of brown people.

So you'd like to see Muslims kill a WHOLE lot more Americans, just to even things out?

How Progressive of you.

 

[Roudy]

Don't worry were way ahead on the killing of brown people.

So you'd like to see Muslims kill a WHOLE lot more Americans, just to even things out?

How Progressive of you.

 

[Coyote]

So you never read your own source and you can't even address the points it made?

Last I checked, the whole "have you quit beating your wife" routine was not only a logical fallacy, but the sign of a weak intellect.

No wonder you resort to name calling.

Oh, and what name did I call you?

Let me see...you cited a source, mangled it's statistics in an attempt to create a false argument and then can't even man up to the fact that you didn't bother to read the source. Or more likely, you got mangled quotes from a hate site that cited the source and you never bothered to check.

No wonder you keep dodging.

 

[Coyote]

I don't see anyone trying to legislate sharia law in the US, do you? Even if they do try, they won't get very far.

Ohhh, a straw man.

How clever...

Do you know what a strawman is?