CDZ Muslim Terrorism versus Islamopohobes

[Coyote]

Those lunatic folks that stalk military funerals to spread their gay hate message? Us normal Christians are furious with them. We are careful in sermons to stay away from political commentary, unless the subject is brought to us by government intervention. We understand there is a line.

So, in other words, you don't speak out against the actions of Westboro. But you expect other religionists to speak out against the maniacs among their ranks.

Even though the WB is a small group, the point is valid - no other religion is called upon to not only denounce, but march in opposition to the fanatics. And even when it's denounced as not-of-the-religion, that isn't enough. It's when different standards are applied that charges of "anti-whatever" gain credibility.

 

[Coyote]

To me the question is not "to compromise or not to compromise"

Because it seems to me we already did compromise, greatly.

This is very obvious in this NSA situation.

If we have not compromised, if we have not clicked that checkbox that comes along with every step you are taking in your online world, you pretty much couldnt have functioned in this todays society.

So we have created this giant tool that makes us much more efficient, functional and analytical.

In my opinion; if there is a security weakness in this country, it is not because we are willing or not willing to compromise, it is because we cant use the tools available to us, wisely and properly.


Take ISIS for instance, could not have existed w/o internet....

We compromised because it was easy and people chose safety over liberty. So yes, the compromise already happened. ISIS integrated the internet, it would have existed without it.

We compromise when we're afraid and 9/11 made us feel very vulnerable and very afraid. It's the same way, I suspect people felt when the Japanese were interned. People were willing to support invading Iraq primarily because the shadow of 9/11 was still hovering over us. And...the results are very very scary in my opinion.

I disagree though, on ISIS. Unlike prior groups like AQ - ISIS grew via the internet - it created sophisticated marketing and recruitment schemes that could invade literally every cell phone without the knowledge of family. ISIS success is in large part due to the internet and social media and it is frightening because we don't have a good plan to deal with it. Authorities working with Muslim communities are attempting to combat it through social media and counter propoganda....but is that enough? It's one of the most complex threats to face us because it is not amenable to conventional warfare alone.

 

[Coyote]

Would that be required then for others choosing religous arbitration? Jews, Catholics, Mormans?

I suppose you need to for equality's sake.

All of those faiths place women in a subordinate position to men - some sects of those faith extremely so. Shouldn't it also be out of concern for women?

My intention was to protect Muslim women.

What about protecting Jewish women, Catholic women, Morman womwn? Orthodox Jewish women can not get a religious divorce with out the husbands permission even in the most abusive marriage. Shouldn't they be protected?

Another point, often missed is that though these religious abritation groups can help adjudicate issues such as child custody and the division of property in a divorce - must be ratified by a secular court to have the force of law.

Jewish women in most ALL countries have full secular rights and it's OPTIONAL to void the religious marriage contract. Not an Orthodox woman in the Western countries forced to remain in a marriage because of a religious contract. HER choice how to deal with the fall-out (if any) of jilting the religious authority. Plenty of other rabbis would remarry her without voiding the Ketubah.. Don't ask me how I know..

The same applies to Muslim women in western countries.

But, the point made earlier was needing a religious divorce in order to maintain her relationship to her community and her faith. It is her choice - just like a Muslim woman.

And that is what this is about - women (whether Musliim or Jewish) can choose to go the secular route if they want or they can choose religious arbritation. It's a choice. That's the point I"m trying to make with those that are trying to make Islamic religious arbritation as somehow being uniquely anti-woman.

Ok. I won't ask.


still....?

 

[Coyote]

No he didn't. He accurately quoted you, first of all, then he raised some very valid points about the hypocrisy of your statements.

How do you square fear of "mullahs" with your position that the U.S. should not be a secular state?

Unless you are here and now repudiating your prior statements.

I tease pillars a lot, but it is she. Mullahs are in the ME for the most part and they do have tremendous sway with the populous. As far as the US secular state comment, we have been around over 239 years, still no theocracy here. Seems your "fears" are at least equally unfounded.

If the Christian majority hasn't managed to turn us into a theocracy...a Muslim minority certainly won't.

 

[Foxfyre]

Source?

100% of Muslims would be a huge stretch and isn't supported by any poll I have seen. However, a majority of Muslims across the world, shielded by an anonymous poll, still believe Sharia is the revealed word of God/Allah and should be the law of the land. Publically, Mudda is probably right that close to 100% would say that as ramifications for speaking against the Qu'ran can be quite terrible.

View attachment 75448
Chapter 1: Beliefs About Sharia

But as for Christians, all we have to do is look at our laws in a predominantly Christian country to know that those who would have the secular law reflect Biblical law are in short supply.

I can't lay my hands on it at the moment, but the last poll of U.S. Muslims I saw, about 40% said they would support Sharia as the law of the land. About 12% of those would support the most extreme version including execution for blasphemy, etc.

That might be the poll referenced in this article: Trump Calls for Ban on Muslims, Cites Deeply Flawed Poll

I'm skeptical of it. Pew on the other hand has a solid reputation for it's methodology.

No, the poll I'm thinking of had absolutely nothing to do with Trump or anything he has said or quoted. But I know quite a few Muslims around here, and the ladies, though imminently talented, personable, and lovely to be around, all wear the traditional hijab. Every single one of them. That would be housewives, managers, store clerks, nurses, doctors, etc. And that absolutely reflects Sharia.

A Muslim woman wearing a hijab is no different from a Christian woman wearing a cross - a reflection of their faith. Hijab isn't even common to all Muslim cultures. One thing I wonder though - if a Muslim woman did not choose to wear one, would you even know she was Muslim?

I want to add something here - the only poll I've seen that comes close to supporting what you claim is the one Donald Trump cited, but the actual poll is here: Poll of U.S. Muslims Reveals Ominous Levels Of Support For Islamic Supremacists’ Doctrine of Shariah, Jihad and it's methodology (unlike Pew) has been heavily criticized.

A woman wearing a hijab is following her religious beliefs in the same way as a Jewish man wearing a kippa. None of that is indicative of "support" for Sharia as law of the land or Halakha as law of the land.

If this was directed to me, no, I went to look for my prior source, and I think it was Pew but I am still looking for the particular article. I don't know what source Trump was using and I didn't hear him say that.

Outside the USA:
The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society

And inside the USA here is a tremendously detailed study by Pew--the comparison of how many think the Qu'ran is the literal word of God/Allah is on I think Pg 29 or close to that. And that would be a good reflection of those that support Sharia law.
http://www.pewresearch.org/files/old-assets/pdf/muslim-americans.pdf

 

[Coyote]

That might be the poll referenced in this article: Trump Calls for Ban on Muslims, Cites Deeply Flawed Poll

I'm skeptical of it. Pew on the other hand has a solid reputation for it's methodology.

No, the poll I'm thinking of had absolutely nothing to do with Trump or anything he has said or quoted. But I know quite a few Muslims around here, and the ladies, though imminently talented, personable, and lovely to be around, all wear the traditional hijab. Every single one of them. That would be housewives, managers, store clerks, nurses, doctors, etc. And that absolutely reflects Sharia.

A Muslim woman wearing a hijab is no different from a Christian woman wearing a cross - a reflection of their faith. Hijab isn't even common to all Muslim cultures. One thing I wonder though - if a Muslim woman did not choose to wear one, would you even know she was Muslim?

But ALL Christians I know do not wear crosses. ALL Muslim women I know do wear the hijab. That's the difference.

There is nothing wrong it it. Some are quite beautiful. But it does reflect an obedience to Sharia law just as the Christian cross usually reflects that the person is Christian.

"Rational" strikes me as an attempt to justify bigotry.

Well, that certainly lays down the gauntlet.

Support the most bigoted, intolerant ideology on the planet that has war against all other ideologies built into its very fabric, or be called a bigot.

What an Orwellian choice. I guess I'll be the bigot, and you can be the double plus good unbigot, then.

It's a religion that incorporates a wide variety of beliefs and practices that differ around the world. It incorporates many of the same tenants and rules and intolerances as it's two related religions - they all have a shared ideology. They all have texts that call for some pretty crappy behavior and considerable intolerance as well as calls for good behavior and tolerance. The problem - in my opinion - is not the actual theology, but what followers choose to take from it, and that choice is what seperates the ancient world from the modern world. A rational view would realize that, and would attack the practices and beliefs that go against modern principles of tolerance and equality and support the ones that work towards tolerance and equality. A rational view would recognize extremism for what it is, and find ways to marginalize it so it doesn't affect vulnerable people with its propoganda. A rational view recognizes that not all Muslims believe the same and that they represent many different cultures.

Any religious prescription for morals and life that is so ambiguously written that it ALLOWS the constant creation of hateful militant groups would not be a very good religion.

Except it's not "constant" - it's relatively recent and it's driven by many many factors beyond just religion. It's also not unique - Christianity has undergone similar upheavels and "hateful" militancy through it's history. These religions along with Judaism, are unique in that they have written texts (do any others?) that are very old, have been written by multiple authors, often long after the deaths of the major players, reinterpretted by religious-political powers and through many languages. They are full of contradictions. That means it isn't that difficult to pick and choose your message if you are so inclined and it's why so many crazy cults and militant groups can spring up. I don't think that makes it a bad religion because there is also much good in each.

But here's the deal -- I don't hate Islam. I hate the Arab cultures and values that have taken those ANCIENT world concepts and BROUGHT them into the MODERN world. The fact is that successful Arab nations are built around tyrannical authority and INFUSED with theological baggage. When TYRANTS control the politics -- they always abuse the "religious" part of their authority. Happened to Christians before as well when STATE -SPONSORED Inquisitions and crusades were mounted. NONE of that would have happened without state sanction.

And with that I fully agree!

And TODAY -- a large portion of the Muslim extremism that we are worrying about are state supported PROXIES for clashes WITHIN the Arab culture. Iran supporting Hamas in Gaza and proxies in Syria is a good example of Arab Imperialism.. They all want to kill each other essentially.

Now that SHOULD in principle make the US and EU IMMUNE to this constant carnage. But because the THEOLOGY is mixed with the POLITICAL --- These militant Jihadists that are making the news DAILY with senseless killings and violence are pissed at their FORMER Arab leaders whom they see as PUPPETS of Western influence. And of course our stupid destructive efforts to "democratize" the Arab world. We took multiple swats at the bee hive. And so the West (and Israel and moderate Arab countries) are the prime targets.

Truth.

The only reason the militancy and violence have not been "constant" in the Arab world is that in MODERN history, Arab lands fell under the jurisdiction of outside powers. Thomas Jefferson went to war with the Barbary Pirates who were terrorizing sea lanes and taking hostages to Tripoli..

The US does have a unique situation in that Islam has a chance to thrive in secular Western Societies. But it must be isolated from the perverse abusive Islam that exists today in the world. . And THAT is where "Islamaphobia" stems from. A righteous concern to isolate ourselves from chaos and violence. It protects the American Islamic community as well to do so.

So doing something as stupid as the Europeans have just done -- would never be tolerated here. We need to COMPLETELY vet refugees from Arab violence. OR BETTER -- provide safe zones and representation for them in the Mid East UNTIL we can sort them out.

Why that has not happened --- is a crime. Should have been UN administered safe zones in Syria 2 years ago...

Pirates were a common problem - we even had our own. Muslims were no worse than the Christians in terms of militancy, warfare and general bad behavior during that time, it was quid pro quo.

I disagree with what I bolded in the sense that that is NOT what Islamophobia is - when you broadbrush and entire religion like that, when you buy into conspiracy theories (for example that Muslim Americans can't be patriotic Americans), when you apply seperate standards to Islam than to any other religion - that is the definition of bigotry. It may stem from fear - but all bigotry does imo. Today, it's the Muslims. Yesterday it was the Jews - associated with commies and anarchists and dirty subhuman East Europeans (also smudged by the commie taint) - crude, but that was the rhetoric that surrounded these people and "commies" and "anarchists" were labels readily applied. We didn't vet them then - we turned them away.

Are there legitimate fears of extremists? Yes. Were there legitimate fears of commies? Yes. The main difference between then and now is that information and disinformation spread equally quickly and virally, as does the prospect of radicalization, militant recruitment - all can happen so much more quickly. Likewise we have far better avenues for vetting potential refugees then we ever did before and I agree with vetting them - no argument there.

 

[Coyote]

100% of Muslims would be a huge stretch and isn't supported by any poll I have seen. However, a majority of Muslims across the world, shielded by an anonymous poll, still believe Sharia is the revealed word of God/Allah and should be the law of the land. Publically, Mudda is probably right that close to 100% would say that as ramifications for speaking against the Qu'ran can be quite terrible.

View attachment 75448
Chapter 1: Beliefs About Sharia

But as for Christians, all we have to do is look at our laws in a predominantly Christian country to know that those who would have the secular law reflect Biblical law are in short supply.

I can't lay my hands on it at the moment, but the last poll of U.S. Muslims I saw, about 40% said they would support Sharia as the law of the land. About 12% of those would support the most extreme version including execution for blasphemy, etc.

That might be the poll referenced in this article: Trump Calls for Ban on Muslims, Cites Deeply Flawed Poll

I'm skeptical of it. Pew on the other hand has a solid reputation for it's methodology.

No, the poll I'm thinking of had absolutely nothing to do with Trump or anything he has said or quoted. But I know quite a few Muslims around here, and the ladies, though imminently talented, personable, and lovely to be around, all wear the traditional hijab. Every single one of them. That would be housewives, managers, store clerks, nurses, doctors, etc. And that absolutely reflects Sharia.

A Muslim woman wearing a hijab is no different from a Christian woman wearing a cross - a reflection of their faith. Hijab isn't even common to all Muslim cultures. One thing I wonder though - if a Muslim woman did not choose to wear one, would you even know she was Muslim?

I want to add something here - the only poll I've seen that comes close to supporting what you claim is the one Donald Trump cited, but the actual poll is here: Poll of U.S. Muslims Reveals Ominous Levels Of Support For Islamic Supremacists’ Doctrine of Shariah, Jihad and it's methodology (unlike Pew) has been heavily criticized.

A woman wearing a hijab is following her religious beliefs in the same way as a Jewish man wearing a kippa. None of that is indicative of "support" for Sharia as law of the land or Halakha as law of the land.

If this was directed to me, no, I went to look for my prior source, and it was Pew. I don't know what source Trump was using and I didn't hear him say that.

If you can find a Pew source indicating a larage number of American Muslims support Sharia as the law of the land I would be very interested in reading it.

 

[pillars]

100% of Muslims would be a huge stretch and isn't supported by any poll I have seen. However, a majority of Muslims across the world, shielded by an anonymous poll, still believe Sharia is the revealed word of God/Allah and should be the law of the land. Publically, Mudda is probably right that close to 100% would say that as ramifications for speaking against the Qu'ran can be quite terrible.

View attachment 75448
Chapter 1: Beliefs About Sharia

But as for Christians, all we have to do is look at our laws in a predominantly Christian country to know that those who would have the secular law reflect Biblical law are in short supply.

I can't lay my hands on it at the moment, but the last poll of U.S. Muslims I saw, about 40% said they would support Sharia as the law of the land. About 12% of those would support the most extreme version including execution for blasphemy, etc.

That might be the poll referenced in this article: Trump Calls for Ban on Muslims, Cites Deeply Flawed Poll

I'm skeptical of it. Pew on the other hand has a solid reputation for it's methodology.

No, the poll I'm thinking of had absolutely nothing to do with Trump or anything he has said or quoted. But I know quite a few Muslims around here, and the ladies, though imminently talented, personable, and lovely to be around, all wear the traditional hijab. Every single one of them. That would be housewives, managers, store clerks, nurses, doctors, etc. And that absolutely reflects Sharia.

A Muslim woman wearing a hijab is no different from a Christian woman wearing a cross - a reflection of their faith. Hijab isn't even common to all Muslim cultures. One thing I wonder though - if a Muslim woman did not choose to wear one, would you even know she was Muslim?

I want to add something here - the only poll I've seen that comes close to supporting what you claim is the one Donald Trump cited, but the actual poll is here: Poll of U.S. Muslims Reveals Ominous Levels Of Support For Islamic Supremacists’ Doctrine of Shariah, Jihad and it's methodology (unlike Pew) has been heavily criticized.

A woman wearing a hijab is following her religious beliefs in the same way as a Jewish man wearing a kippa. None of that is indicative of "support" for Sharia as law of the land or Halakha as law of the land.

If this was directed to me, no, I went to look for my prior source, and I think it was Pew but I am still looking for the particular article. I don't know what source Trump was using and I didn't hear him say that.

Outside the USA:
The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society

And inside the USA here is a tremendously detailed study by Pew--the comparison of how many think the Qu'ran is the literal word of God/Allah is on I think Pg 29 or close to that. And that would be a good reflection of those that support Sharia law.
http://www.pewresearch.org/files/old-assets/pdf/muslim-americans.pdf

Don't you consider the bible the literal word of God?

How is that different?

Many Christians don't support legal abortions--for religious reasons. They don't support gay marriage--for religious reasons. They push for prayer in schools.

Sharia courts only apply to Muslims but Christians in the US routinely seek to force their will on what other people do with their pregnancies and bodies, who they can marry, and expect accommodations for the practice of their faith in the public space from people who do not share their faith.

Often while condemning Muslims for doing the same thing.

The hypocrisy gets old.

 

[Coyote]

Europe and America really have different problems.

Europe is on the frontlines of the refugee crisis - it's their back door. In much the same way as the South American migrant crisis is on our back door. With Europe, it's people fleeing the civil war in Syria, the political instability and cruelties of ISIS and government forces, along with migrants fleeing for economic reasons. With America, it's refugees fleeing the lawlenssness and violence of gangs and drug cartels and corrupt governments.

The difference between us and Europe in the ME crisis is that the numbers are so so overwhelming and the people coming in are coming from a multitude of countries with a multitude of problems and arrive in desperate conditions in greater numbers than we have had on our southern border. And no one is prepared or has a good plan to effectively handle it much less vet people. The burden falls on a few countries when it should be on the EU as a whole. I'm thinking that it is like the Cuban boat crisis/Haiti crisis/South and Central American crisis all rolled into one crammed into just a few years.

I understand the concern of Europeans with culture clash. No country should be forced to absorb more immigrants than it can aculturate because that is critical to both immigrant success and preserving communities. Some countries do better jobs at getting immigrants aculturated, into jobs and into communities than do others. Also, countries seem to be unevenly forced to take in refugees. It's a huge problem, and while I've seen many good local solutions and fantastic community responses I've also seen a lot of fear and closed community responses.

No easy answer here because - many of these people (Syria, Iraq) are fleeing horrendous conditions, they have nothing to return to. I see little difference between those refugees, who have suffered at the hand of their government or ISIS than I do the refugees of the Nazi's. The world owes something to help them - we are a global community. It shouldn't fall just on Europe's shoulders or on the shoulders of Jordan, Turkey, and other neighboring countries who have taken the bulk of the refugees.

 

[Coyote]

100% of Muslims would be a huge stretch and isn't supported by any poll I have seen. However, a majority of Muslims across the world, shielded by an anonymous poll, still believe Sharia is the revealed word of God/Allah and should be the law of the land. Publically, Mudda is probably right that close to 100% would say that as ramifications for speaking against the Qu'ran can be quite terrible.

View attachment 75448
Chapter 1: Beliefs About Sharia

But as for Christians, all we have to do is look at our laws in a predominantly Christian country to know that those who would have the secular law reflect Biblical law are in short supply.

I can't lay my hands on it at the moment, but the last poll of U.S. Muslims I saw, about 40% said they would support Sharia as the law of the land. About 12% of those would support the most extreme version including execution for blasphemy, etc.

That might be the poll referenced in this article: Trump Calls for Ban on Muslims, Cites Deeply Flawed Poll

I'm skeptical of it. Pew on the other hand has a solid reputation for it's methodology.

No, the poll I'm thinking of had absolutely nothing to do with Trump or anything he has said or quoted. But I know quite a few Muslims around here, and the ladies, though imminently talented, personable, and lovely to be around, all wear the traditional hijab. Every single one of them. That would be housewives, managers, store clerks, nurses, doctors, etc. And that absolutely reflects Sharia.

A Muslim woman wearing a hijab is no different from a Christian woman wearing a cross - a reflection of their faith. Hijab isn't even common to all Muslim cultures. One thing I wonder though - if a Muslim woman did not choose to wear one, would you even know she was Muslim?

I want to add something here - the only poll I've seen that comes close to supporting what you claim is the one Donald Trump cited, but the actual poll is here: Poll of U.S. Muslims Reveals Ominous Levels Of Support For Islamic Supremacists’ Doctrine of Shariah, Jihad and it's methodology (unlike Pew) has been heavily criticized.

A woman wearing a hijab is following her religious beliefs in the same way as a Jewish man wearing a kippa. None of that is indicative of "support" for Sharia as law of the land or Halakha as law of the land.

If this was directed to me, no, I went to look for my prior source, and I think it was Pew but I am still looking for the particular article. I don't know what source Trump was using and I didn't hear him say that.

Outside the USA:
The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society

And inside the USA here is a tremendously detailed study by Pew--the comparison of how many think the Qu'ran is the literal word of God/Allah is on I think Pg 29 or close to that. And that would be a good reflection of those that support Sharia law.
http://www.pewresearch.org/files/old-assets/pdf/muslim-americans.pdf

I disagree with that conclusion (but thanks for the sources! ) - there is a distinct difference between believing the Quran is the literal word of God, and as such following some version of Sharia and feeling that Sharia should be the law of the land.

Many Christians feel the Bible is the literal word of God - but they don't feel biblical law should be the law of the land.

 

[Foxfyre]

That might be the poll referenced in this article: Trump Calls for Ban on Muslims, Cites Deeply Flawed Poll

I'm skeptical of it. Pew on the other hand has a solid reputation for it's methodology.

No, the poll I'm thinking of had absolutely nothing to do with Trump or anything he has said or quoted. But I know quite a few Muslims around here, and the ladies, though imminently talented, personable, and lovely to be around, all wear the traditional hijab. Every single one of them. That would be housewives, managers, store clerks, nurses, doctors, etc. And that absolutely reflects Sharia.

A Muslim woman wearing a hijab is no different from a Christian woman wearing a cross - a reflection of their faith. Hijab isn't even common to all Muslim cultures. One thing I wonder though - if a Muslim woman did not choose to wear one, would you even know she was Muslim?

I want to add something here - the only poll I've seen that comes close to supporting what you claim is the one Donald Trump cited, but the actual poll is here: Poll of U.S. Muslims Reveals Ominous Levels Of Support For Islamic Supremacists’ Doctrine of Shariah, Jihad and it's methodology (unlike Pew) has been heavily criticized.

A woman wearing a hijab is following her religious beliefs in the same way as a Jewish man wearing a kippa. None of that is indicative of "support" for Sharia as law of the land or Halakha as law of the land.

If this was directed to me, no, I went to look for my prior source, and it was Pew. I don't know what source Trump was using and I didn't hear him say that.

If you can find a Pew source indicating a larage number of American Muslims support Sharia as the law of the land I would be very interested in reading it.

Again that is what is implied by those who think the Qu'ran is the literal word of God/Allah. And that 'word' commands Sharia Law as most Muslim interpret the Qu'ran supplemented by the Hadith. Again I think that will be on or close to Page 29 of the Pew study I posted.

Although the Qur’an is the basic source of Islamic jurisprudence, it is not intended as a legislative text. The majority of the Qur’an’s 6,239 verses are metaphorical, allegorical, and historical passages, as well as statements of moral principle and religious injunctions. The number of verses dealing specifically with legal issues, however, is usually estimated between just 200 and 500. Given the dearth of legal content in the Qur’an, sharia is normally supplemented by records of the customs and sayings (hadith and sunna) of the Prophet Muhammad. The authority for this practice stems from the Qur’an itself, which in several verses instructs Muslims to obey both the teachings and the practices of the Prophet.​

Reclaiming Tradition: Islamic Law in a Modern World | International Affairs Review

 

[pillars]

That might be the poll referenced in this article: Trump Calls for Ban on Muslims, Cites Deeply Flawed Poll

I'm skeptical of it. Pew on the other hand has a solid reputation for it's methodology.

No, the poll I'm thinking of had absolutely nothing to do with Trump or anything he has said or quoted. But I know quite a few Muslims around here, and the ladies, though imminently talented, personable, and lovely to be around, all wear the traditional hijab. Every single one of them. That would be housewives, managers, store clerks, nurses, doctors, etc. And that absolutely reflects Sharia.

A Muslim woman wearing a hijab is no different from a Christian woman wearing a cross - a reflection of their faith. Hijab isn't even common to all Muslim cultures. One thing I wonder though - if a Muslim woman did not choose to wear one, would you even know she was Muslim?

I want to add something here - the only poll I've seen that comes close to supporting what you claim is the one Donald Trump cited, but the actual poll is here: Poll of U.S. Muslims Reveals Ominous Levels Of Support For Islamic Supremacists’ Doctrine of Shariah, Jihad and it's methodology (unlike Pew) has been heavily criticized.

A woman wearing a hijab is following her religious beliefs in the same way as a Jewish man wearing a kippa. None of that is indicative of "support" for Sharia as law of the land or Halakha as law of the land.

If this was directed to me, no, I went to look for my prior source, and I think it was Pew but I am still looking for the particular article. I don't know what source Trump was using and I didn't hear him say that.

Outside the USA:
The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society

And inside the USA here is a tremendously detailed study by Pew--the comparison of how many think the Qu'ran is the literal word of God/Allah is on I think Pg 29 or close to that. And that would be a good reflection of those that support Sharia law.
http://www.pewresearch.org/files/old-assets/pdf/muslim-americans.pdf

I disagree with that conclusion (but thanks for the sources! ) - there is a distinct difference between believing the Quran is the literal word of God, and as such following some version of Sharia and feeling that Sharia should be the law of the land.

Many Christians feel the Bible is the literal word of God - but they don't feel biblical law should be the law of the land.

Unless it comes to other people having abortions or being gay or smoking pot.

 

[pillars]

No, the poll I'm thinking of had absolutely nothing to do with Trump or anything he has said or quoted. But I know quite a few Muslims around here, and the ladies, though imminently talented, personable, and lovely to be around, all wear the traditional hijab. Every single one of them. That would be housewives, managers, store clerks, nurses, doctors, etc. And that absolutely reflects Sharia.

A Muslim woman wearing a hijab is no different from a Christian woman wearing a cross - a reflection of their faith. Hijab isn't even common to all Muslim cultures. One thing I wonder though - if a Muslim woman did not choose to wear one, would you even know she was Muslim?

I want to add something here - the only poll I've seen that comes close to supporting what you claim is the one Donald Trump cited, but the actual poll is here: Poll of U.S. Muslims Reveals Ominous Levels Of Support For Islamic Supremacists’ Doctrine of Shariah, Jihad and it's methodology (unlike Pew) has been heavily criticized.

A woman wearing a hijab is following her religious beliefs in the same way as a Jewish man wearing a kippa. None of that is indicative of "support" for Sharia as law of the land or Halakha as law of the land.

If this was directed to me, no, I went to look for my prior source, and it was Pew. I don't know what source Trump was using and I didn't hear him say that.

If you can find a Pew source indicating a larage number of American Muslims support Sharia as the law of the land I would be very interested in reading it.

Again that is what is implied by those who think the Qu'ran is the literal word of God/Allah. And that 'word' commands Sharia Law as most Muslim interpret the Qu'ran supplemented by the Hadith. Again I think that will be on or close to Page 29 of the Pew study I posted.

Although the Qur’an is the basic source of Islamic jurisprudence, it is not intended as a legislative text. The majority of the Qur’an’s 6,239 verses are metaphorical, allegorical, and historical passages, as well as statements of moral principle and religious injunctions. The number of verses dealing specifically with legal issues, however, is usually estimated between just 200 and 500. Given the dearth of legal content in the Qur’an, sharia is normally supplemented by records of the customs and sayings (hadith and sunna) of the Prophet Muhammad. The authority for this practice stems from the Qur’an itself, which in several verses instructs Muslims to obey both the teachings and the practices of the Prophet.​

Reclaiming Tradition: Islamic Law in a Modern World | International Affairs Review

No. That is your opinion of what is implied, but you are not a credible expert on the subject and have not proven your claim with evidence.

 

[Foxfyre]

A Muslim woman wearing a hijab is no different from a Christian woman wearing a cross - a reflection of their faith. Hijab isn't even common to all Muslim cultures. One thing I wonder though - if a Muslim woman did not choose to wear one, would you even know she was Muslim?

I want to add something here - the only poll I've seen that comes close to supporting what you claim is the one Donald Trump cited, but the actual poll is here: Poll of U.S. Muslims Reveals Ominous Levels Of Support For Islamic Supremacists’ Doctrine of Shariah, Jihad and it's methodology (unlike Pew) has been heavily criticized.

A woman wearing a hijab is following her religious beliefs in the same way as a Jewish man wearing a kippa. None of that is indicative of "support" for Sharia as law of the land or Halakha as law of the land.

If this was directed to me, no, I went to look for my prior source, and it was Pew. I don't know what source Trump was using and I didn't hear him say that.

If you can find a Pew source indicating a larage number of American Muslims support Sharia as the law of the land I would be very interested in reading it.

Again that is what is implied by those who think the Qu'ran is the literal word of God/Allah. And that 'word' commands Sharia Law as most Muslim interpret the Qu'ran supplemented by the Hadith. Again I think that will be on or close to Page 29 of the Pew study I posted.

Although the Qur’an is the basic source of Islamic jurisprudence, it is not intended as a legislative text. The majority of the Qur’an’s 6,239 verses are metaphorical, allegorical, and historical passages, as well as statements of moral principle and religious injunctions. The number of verses dealing specifically with legal issues, however, is usually estimated between just 200 and 500. Given the dearth of legal content in the Qur’an, sharia is normally supplemented by records of the customs and sayings (hadith and sunna) of the Prophet Muhammad. The authority for this practice stems from the Qur’an itself, which in several verses instructs Muslims to obey both the teachings and the practices of the Prophet.​

Reclaiming Tradition: Islamic Law in a Modern World | International Affairs Review

No. That is your opinion of what is implied, but you are not a credible expert on the subject and have not proven your claim with evidence.

Okay. I doubt anybody who sees it as I see it would be a 'credible expert' on this subject in many eyes. Not that I ever claimed to be an expert. But do feel free to post your evidence to rebut my view that the Qu'ran, supplemented by the Hadith, is the basis for Sharia Law. I really doubt you will find much though.

 

[Coyote]

No, the poll I'm thinking of had absolutely nothing to do with Trump or anything he has said or quoted. But I know quite a few Muslims around here, and the ladies, though imminently talented, personable, and lovely to be around, all wear the traditional hijab. Every single one of them. That would be housewives, managers, store clerks, nurses, doctors, etc. And that absolutely reflects Sharia.

A Muslim woman wearing a hijab is no different from a Christian woman wearing a cross - a reflection of their faith. Hijab isn't even common to all Muslim cultures. One thing I wonder though - if a Muslim woman did not choose to wear one, would you even know she was Muslim?

I want to add something here - the only poll I've seen that comes close to supporting what you claim is the one Donald Trump cited, but the actual poll is here: Poll of U.S. Muslims Reveals Ominous Levels Of Support For Islamic Supremacists’ Doctrine of Shariah, Jihad and it's methodology (unlike Pew) has been heavily criticized.

A woman wearing a hijab is following her religious beliefs in the same way as a Jewish man wearing a kippa. None of that is indicative of "support" for Sharia as law of the land or Halakha as law of the land.

If this was directed to me, no, I went to look for my prior source, and it was Pew. I don't know what source Trump was using and I didn't hear him say that.

If you can find a Pew source indicating a larage number of American Muslims support Sharia as the law of the land I would be very interested in reading it.

Again that is what is implied by those who think the Qu'ran is the literal word of God/Allah. And that 'word' commands Sharia Law as most Muslim interpret the Qu'ran supplemented by the Hadith. Again I think that will be on or close to Page 29 of the Pew study I posted.

Although the Qur’an is the basic source of Islamic jurisprudence, it is not intended as a legislative text. The majority of the Qur’an’s 6,239 verses are metaphorical, allegorical, and historical passages, as well as statements of moral principle and religious injunctions. The number of verses dealing specifically with legal issues, however, is usually estimated between just 200 and 500. Given the dearth of legal content in the Qur’an, sharia is normally supplemented by records of the customs and sayings (hadith and sunna) of the Prophet Muhammad. The authority for this practice stems from the Qur’an itself, which in several verses instructs Muslims to obey both the teachings and the practices of the Prophet.​

Reclaiming Tradition: Islamic Law in a Modern World | International Affairs Review

Again, that is NOT the same as saying that they want Sharia to be the Law of the Land. Even in the Pew Polls - there were significant portions of Muslims (and in non-western countries) who disagreed with that. So assuming that American Muslims would want that makes no sense - it's sheer speculation.

 

[Coyote]

No, the poll I'm thinking of had absolutely nothing to do with Trump or anything he has said or quoted. But I know quite a few Muslims around here, and the ladies, though imminently talented, personable, and lovely to be around, all wear the traditional hijab. Every single one of them. That would be housewives, managers, store clerks, nurses, doctors, etc. And that absolutely reflects Sharia.

A Muslim woman wearing a hijab is no different from a Christian woman wearing a cross - a reflection of their faith. Hijab isn't even common to all Muslim cultures. One thing I wonder though - if a Muslim woman did not choose to wear one, would you even know she was Muslim?

I want to add something here - the only poll I've seen that comes close to supporting what you claim is the one Donald Trump cited, but the actual poll is here: Poll of U.S. Muslims Reveals Ominous Levels Of Support For Islamic Supremacists’ Doctrine of Shariah, Jihad and it's methodology (unlike Pew) has been heavily criticized.

A woman wearing a hijab is following her religious beliefs in the same way as a Jewish man wearing a kippa. None of that is indicative of "support" for Sharia as law of the land or Halakha as law of the land.

If this was directed to me, no, I went to look for my prior source, and I think it was Pew but I am still looking for the particular article. I don't know what source Trump was using and I didn't hear him say that.

Outside the USA:
The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society

And inside the USA here is a tremendously detailed study by Pew--the comparison of how many think the Qu'ran is the literal word of God/Allah is on I think Pg 29 or close to that. And that would be a good reflection of those that support Sharia law.
http://www.pewresearch.org/files/old-assets/pdf/muslim-americans.pdf

I disagree with that conclusion (but thanks for the sources! ) - there is a distinct difference between believing the Quran is the literal word of God, and as such following some version of Sharia and feeling that Sharia should be the law of the land.

Many Christians feel the Bible is the literal word of God - but they don't feel biblical law should be the law of the land.

Unless it comes to other people having abortions or being gay or smoking pot.

Strictly speaking I don't think God said anything about abortions or pot, and not even much on homosexuality...it's all in the interpretations...

 

[pillars]

Okay. I doubt anybody who sees it as I see it would be a 'credible expert' on this subject in many eyes. Not that I ever claimed to be an expert. But do feel free to post your evidence to rebut my view that the Qu'ran, supplemented by the Hadith, is the basis for Sharia Law. I really doubt you will find much though.

Why would I need to rebut that? My agreement will still not make your position logically coherent.

Let's start here: I am not quibbling with experts, I am expressing that your opinion on the subject is not very convincing without evidence.

And instead of providing evidence of your original claim, you have fallen back on ergo decedo fallacy. That is your choice, but it does not further your argument.

I agree that the Quran is the basis for sharia law, but believing the Quran is the inspired word of God does not equate to wanting to make it law in the U.S.

Your position is an appeal to probability fallacy, and thus, also does not make your case. You want to say if A is true, B must also be true, but that is faulty logic.

Out of curiosity, do you believe the Bible is the inspired word of God? If so, do you believe we should use Old Testament legal codes as the basis for law in the U.S.?

You don't seem to see it, but that's the same logical correlation you are drawing.

 

[saveliberty]

Those lunatic folks that stalk military funerals to spread their gay hate message? Us normal Christians are furious with them. We are careful in sermons to stay away from political commentary, unless the subject is brought to us by government intervention. We understand there is a line.

So, in other words, you don't speak out against the actions of Westboro. But you expect other religionists to speak out against the maniacs among their ranks.

Even though the WB is a small group, the point is valid - no other religion is called upon to not only denounce, but march in opposition to the fanatics. And even when it's denounced as not-of-the-religion, that isn't enough. It's when different standards are applied that charges of "anti-whatever" gain credibility.

There have been many counter rallies to Westboro. In fact they usually have to protect the Westboro protesters. Do you think those counter protesters are all nonreligios folk?

 

[pillars]

Even though the WB is a small group, the point is valid - no other religion is called upon to not only denounce, but march in opposition to the fanatics. And even when it's denounced as not-of-the-religion, that isn't enough. It's when different standards are applied that charges of "anti-whatever" gain credibility.

There have been many counter rallies to Westboro. In fact they usually have to protect the Westboro protesters. Do you think those counter protesters are all nonreligios folk?

Coyote's point still stands. The majority of Christians disavow affiliation with Westboro. Even though the majority of Islamics aren't terrorists and aren't loyal to them, you still hold them accountable for terrorism in a way you do not hold Christians responsible for Westboro.

 

[saveliberty]

Okay. I doubt anybody who sees it as I see it would be a 'credible expert' on this subject in many eyes. Not that I ever claimed to be an expert. But do feel free to post your evidence to rebut my view that the Qu'ran, supplemented by the Hadith, is the basis for Sharia Law. I really doubt you will find much though.

Why would I need to rebut that? My agreement will still not make your position logically coherent.

Let's start here: I am not quibbling with experts, I am expressing that your opinion on the subject is not very convincing without evidence.

And instead of providing evidence of your original claim, you have fallen back on ergo decedo fallacy. That is your choice, but it does not further your argument.

I agree that the Quran is the basis for sharia law, but believing the Quran is the inspired word of God does not equate to wanting to make it law in the U.S.

Your position is an appeal to probability fallacy, and thus, also does not make your case. You want to say if A is true, B must also be true, but A and B are not necessarily one and the same.

Out of curiosity, do you believe the Bible is the inspired word of God? If so, do you believe we should use Old Testament legal codes as the basis for law in the U.S.?

You don't seem to see it, but that's the same logical correlation you are drawing.

Most of the guidelines indicated in the Sharia law are sourced from the Quran which is the Holy Scripture for Islam followers. The other basis for the Sharia law is the actual practice of the prophet Muhammad as indicated in the Sunnah.

All moral and/or religious codes associated with Sharia law were established after the death of Muhammad. In the past, Muhammad’s ways were revered and deemed as the perfect example for Muslims in terms of a way of life and practices. The word “sharia” itself literally translates to “pathway to be followed.” With this concept, Islam followers are to follow the path of righteousness as demonstrated by the practice of Muhammad. Aside from Muhammad’s life, the Quran also lends various provisions and guidelines to Sharia law. The Quran is touted as the word of God, and so many cultural laws and standards are based on this particular book.

Read more: What is Islamic Sharia Law | What is? http://www.qwhatis.com/what-is-islamic-sharia-law/#ixzz49FjeOMbs

Confirms both parties agreement on origin.

If Muslims want Sharia Law in the US they are super stealthy, because google was no help in finding where real attempts have been made to establish courts in the US.