The anti-semite squad

[Penelope]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

funny you bring up the TEN COMMANDMENTS thing, surada. Try asking a muslim ---"what are the ten commandments"------find it amazing if you can recite them. As to the "GOLDEN RULE"--
it is true that what christians have called "the golden rule" is noted in the Koran but not
the fact that it came From Hillel and the talmud. Muhummad's SUCCESSORS ---even his most
immediate

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

war lord in ARABIA------the fashionable thing at that time for arabs was TRIBAL WARFARE.
In general ---in my experience----muslims do not know the TEN COMMANDMENTS. What
surada calls the Golden rule was authored by the Talmudist HILLEL but is attributed to
christians by muslims and is a SUBJECT OF EXTREME SCORN

The ten commandments and the Golden Rule are all in the Koran.. You'd know that if you'd read it.

Your desperation to vilify Muslims and Islam and Muhammed is a shameful attempt to justify theft and murder.

Why the hell didn't you stand up and fight the people who persecuted you in Europe and Russia?

I was born in the USA. None of the highly educated muslims I have met in the USA
ever read the koran-----not in arabic ----nor in their native languages --some FARSI and
some URDU. I read the koran------the "golden rule" is lightly alluded to and the ten
commandments are all but ignored. Easy to understand why muslims do not seem to know
them. Just as shariah law DENIES THE RIGHT OF JEWS to own or use any of the standard
implements of self defense----to wit weapons and horses (and camels) so did the Canon
law of Europe. How did you get so ignorant? You seem about at the level of most of
the catholic school kids I grew up with-------they read neither the OT or the NT and never heard
of the koran. Theft and murder are, INDEED, justified in the koran. Try reading the book

Nothing could quash the OT Hebrews against other Middle Easterners, nothing.

 

[Penelope]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

Checkmate

Wrong.
The penalties for theft, like cutting off a hand, comes from Judaism, not Mohammad.

9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

{...
Matthew 5:30
If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matthew 18:8
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

2 Samuel 4:12
Then David commanded the young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and hung them up beside the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner in Hebron.

Deuteronomy 25:12
then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,

Proverbs 26:6
He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence
Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.

1 Samuel 5:4
But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.

Judges 1:6
But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.

Judges 1:7
Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet
...}

But Mohammad allows for so many ways to avoid it, that it likely never happened.
For example, all the thief has to do is pay compensation for what was stolen.

{...
Below are some of the restriction on the punishment of cutting off the hand of a thief:

• This penalty can only be prescribed by a judge. Therefore, either the owner of the property or other eyewitnesses must apply to the authorities for the judgment first.
• To be able to mention this penalty, the stolen property must be somewhere preserved. If the stolen property was not in a preserved area, the crime is not qualified as theft and the punishment is not implemented.
• Nobody’s hand can be cut off if a person or his/her family for whom he/she is responsible to take care of was starving and therefore stole food. In other words, if their life was in danger, the hand amputation punishment is not implemented.
• None of God’s verses address the children. That clearly means: children are not liable towards God. Their parents or guardians are responsible to teach them what is good or bad, what is lawful or forbidden, until they reach puberty. Then, when they reach the puberty, they become responsible for complying with God’s commands and prohibitions. So, a child who has not reached the puberty cannot be judged by the criminal law for his misdeeds, let alone having his/her hand cut off.
• If the crime was committed in threat of life or under any other type of coercion, the punishment is not implemented.
• If there are no witnesses and the thief himself/herself admits the crime and repents before being caught, the penalty is not implemented.

Still, some ignorant people rush to judge the laws of Islamic Shari’ah, their penalties and sentences as harsh. They grieve for the hand that is cut, but forget, or want to forget, the crime that this hand committed, and the permanent negative effect on the public peace and the evil that the crime entails. They take pity on the criminal and not on the victim.

It should be noted that the Prophet was not a violent or cruel man. Our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a righteous man who strove intensely for justice, and everything he did was in accordance with the commandments of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a man of great qualities. People, even who hated him, saw in him exceptional qualities. He was, as the Qur’an eloquently states, a man of exalted character:

“You are of a great nature and morals.” (al-Qalam 68: 4)

In all of the cases where hand amputation punishment is not implemented, the rights of the victim must also be protected. Then, the thief has to pay for a compensation fee and another fee as punishment. This is called “muqabalah bi’l mithl = equivalent retaliation”. Please see the following link about this:

http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/on-what-circumstances-the-hand-of-a-thief-should-be-cut-off.html
...}

Were the hands of thieves cut off at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? - Islam and the Quran

The verses on the punishment of theft are as follows: .وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ “Cut off...

www.islamandquran.org

1. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in Israel for the crime of theft?

2. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in nearby Saudi Arabia for the crime of theft?

------

Your Honor... the Prosecution rests.

Due to the autocratic PM and the AL Saud family, which we almost had here, the tramp family.

 

[Penelope]

I am embarrassed by you. Why? You’re not a Jew. You’re an Islamist like that zombie, surada.

Unlikely.
From Surada's speech pattern, I would say British or Indian, and more likely Hindi than Moslem.
Zionism is corrupt and evil, and it makes me angry not only because it harms others, but also will cause all Jews like me to be harmed as well.

What does Zionism mean to you? Surada is from Pakistan.

is the surada jerk from Pakistan? I am fascinated. The very first muslims
I knew well were pakistani-----some of them never met a jew before meeting
me but they were TOLD ALL ABOUT JUDAISM during the Khutbah Jumaat FECES
FLINGS. They are thoroughly brain washed drones.

So are the Hasidim in the US, the baby boom and welfare capital of the US.

 

[Penelope]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

No Jesus of Nazareth is not a historical figure. A common name, look at the Jews let Yeshua Bar ʾAbbago go, Jesus of a common name back then.

 

[surada]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

Checkmate

Wrong.
The penalties for theft, like cutting off a hand, comes from Judaism, not Mohammad.

9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

{...
Matthew 5:30
If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matthew 18:8
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

2 Samuel 4:12
Then David commanded the young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and hung them up beside the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner in Hebron.

Deuteronomy 25:12
then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,

Proverbs 26:6
He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence
Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.

1 Samuel 5:4
But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.

Judges 1:6
But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.

Judges 1:7
Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet
...}

But Mohammad allows for so many ways to avoid it, that it likely never happened.
For example, all the thief has to do is pay compensation for what was stolen.

{...
Below are some of the restriction on the punishment of cutting off the hand of a thief:

• This penalty can only be prescribed by a judge. Therefore, either the owner of the property or other eyewitnesses must apply to the authorities for the judgment first.
• To be able to mention this penalty, the stolen property must be somewhere preserved. If the stolen property was not in a preserved area, the crime is not qualified as theft and the punishment is not implemented.
• Nobody’s hand can be cut off if a person or his/her family for whom he/she is responsible to take care of was starving and therefore stole food. In other words, if their life was in danger, the hand amputation punishment is not implemented.
• None of God’s verses address the children. That clearly means: children are not liable towards God. Their parents or guardians are responsible to teach them what is good or bad, what is lawful or forbidden, until they reach puberty. Then, when they reach the puberty, they become responsible for complying with God’s commands and prohibitions. So, a child who has not reached the puberty cannot be judged by the criminal law for his misdeeds, let alone having his/her hand cut off.
• If the crime was committed in threat of life or under any other type of coercion, the punishment is not implemented.
• If there are no witnesses and the thief himself/herself admits the crime and repents before being caught, the penalty is not implemented.

Still, some ignorant people rush to judge the laws of Islamic Shari’ah, their penalties and sentences as harsh. They grieve for the hand that is cut, but forget, or want to forget, the crime that this hand committed, and the permanent negative effect on the public peace and the evil that the crime entails. They take pity on the criminal and not on the victim.

It should be noted that the Prophet was not a violent or cruel man. Our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a righteous man who strove intensely for justice, and everything he did was in accordance with the commandments of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a man of great qualities. People, even who hated him, saw in him exceptional qualities. He was, as the Qur’an eloquently states, a man of exalted character:

“You are of a great nature and morals.” (al-Qalam 68: 4)

In all of the cases where hand amputation punishment is not implemented, the rights of the victim must also be protected. Then, the thief has to pay for a compensation fee and another fee as punishment. This is called “muqabalah bi’l mithl = equivalent retaliation”. Please see the following link about this:

http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/on-what-circumstances-the-hand-of-a-thief-should-be-cut-off.html
...}

Were the hands of thieves cut off at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? - Islam and the Quran

The verses on the punishment of theft are as follows: .وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ “Cut off...

www.islamandquran.org

1. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in Israel for the crime of theft?

2. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in nearby Saudi Arabia for the crime of theft?

------

Your Honor... the Prosecution rests.

Amputation is extremely rare in Arabia. Its the punished for three convictions for grand larceny.

 

[Kondor3]

Rigby5

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

Checkmate

Wrong.
The penalties for theft, like cutting off a hand, comes from Judaism, not Mohammad.

9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

{...
Matthew 5:30
If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matthew 18:8
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

2 Samuel 4:12
Then David commanded the young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and hung them up beside the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner in Hebron.

Deuteronomy 25:12
then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,

Proverbs 26:6
He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence
Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.

1 Samuel 5:4
But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.

Judges 1:6
But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.

Judges 1:7
Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet
...}

But Mohammad allows for so many ways to avoid it, that it likely never happened.
For example, all the thief has to do is pay compensation for what was stolen.

{...
Below are some of the restriction on the punishment of cutting off the hand of a thief:

• This penalty can only be prescribed by a judge. Therefore, either the owner of the property or other eyewitnesses must apply to the authorities for the judgment first.
• To be able to mention this penalty, the stolen property must be somewhere preserved. If the stolen property was not in a preserved area, the crime is not qualified as theft and the punishment is not implemented.
• Nobody’s hand can be cut off if a person or his/her family for whom he/she is responsible to take care of was starving and therefore stole food. In other words, if their life was in danger, the hand amputation punishment is not implemented.
• None of God’s verses address the children. That clearly means: children are not liable towards God. Their parents or guardians are responsible to teach them what is good or bad, what is lawful or forbidden, until they reach puberty. Then, when they reach the puberty, they become responsible for complying with God’s commands and prohibitions. So, a child who has not reached the puberty cannot be judged by the criminal law for his misdeeds, let alone having his/her hand cut off.
• If the crime was committed in threat of life or under any other type of coercion, the punishment is not implemented.
• If there are no witnesses and the thief himself/herself admits the crime and repents before being caught, the penalty is not implemented.

Still, some ignorant people rush to judge the laws of Islamic Shari’ah, their penalties and sentences as harsh. They grieve for the hand that is cut, but forget, or want to forget, the crime that this hand committed, and the permanent negative effect on the public peace and the evil that the crime entails. They take pity on the criminal and not on the victim.

It should be noted that the Prophet was not a violent or cruel man. Our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a righteous man who strove intensely for justice, and everything he did was in accordance with the commandments of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a man of great qualities. People, even who hated him, saw in him exceptional qualities. He was, as the Qur’an eloquently states, a man of exalted character:

“You are of a great nature and morals.” (al-Qalam 68: 4)

In all of the cases where hand amputation punishment is not implemented, the rights of the victim must also be protected. Then, the thief has to pay for a compensation fee and another fee as punishment. This is called “muqabalah bi’l mithl = equivalent retaliation”. Please see the following link about this:

http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/on-what-circumstances-the-hand-of-a-thief-should-be-cut-off.html
...}

Were the hands of thieves cut off at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? - Islam and the Quran

The verses on the punishment of theft are as follows: .وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ “Cut off...

www.islamandquran.org

1. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in Israel for the crime of theft?

2. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in nearby Saudi Arabia for the crime of theft?

------

Your Honor... the Prosecution rests.

Amputation is extremely rare in Arabia. Its the punished for three convictions for grand larceny.

It's not a matter of how RARE it is... the point is that it happens AT ALL... on an OFFICIAL basis... phukking Neanderthals...

 

[Kondor3]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

No Jesus of Nazareth is not a historical figure. A common name, look at the Jews let Yeshua Bar ʾAbbago go, Jesus of a common name back then.

Oh, bull$hit... there is PLENTY of Roman -era commentary stipulating his existence and trial and execution...

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

Checkmate

Wrong.
The penalties for theft, like cutting off a hand, comes from Judaism, not Mohammad.

9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

{...
Matthew 5:30
If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matthew 18:8
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

2 Samuel 4:12
Then David commanded the young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and hung them up beside the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner in Hebron.

Deuteronomy 25:12
then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,

Proverbs 26:6
He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence
Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.

1 Samuel 5:4
But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.

Judges 1:6
But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.

Judges 1:7
Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet
...}

But Mohammad allows for so many ways to avoid it, that it likely never happened.
For example, all the thief has to do is pay compensation for what was stolen.

{...
Below are some of the restriction on the punishment of cutting off the hand of a thief:

• This penalty can only be prescribed by a judge. Therefore, either the owner of the property or other eyewitnesses must apply to the authorities for the judgment first.
• To be able to mention this penalty, the stolen property must be somewhere preserved. If the stolen property was not in a preserved area, the crime is not qualified as theft and the punishment is not implemented.
• Nobody’s hand can be cut off if a person or his/her family for whom he/she is responsible to take care of was starving and therefore stole food. In other words, if their life was in danger, the hand amputation punishment is not implemented.
• None of God’s verses address the children. That clearly means: children are not liable towards God. Their parents or guardians are responsible to teach them what is good or bad, what is lawful or forbidden, until they reach puberty. Then, when they reach the puberty, they become responsible for complying with God’s commands and prohibitions. So, a child who has not reached the puberty cannot be judged by the criminal law for his misdeeds, let alone having his/her hand cut off.
• If the crime was committed in threat of life or under any other type of coercion, the punishment is not implemented.
• If there are no witnesses and the thief himself/herself admits the crime and repents before being caught, the penalty is not implemented.

Still, some ignorant people rush to judge the laws of Islamic Shari’ah, their penalties and sentences as harsh. They grieve for the hand that is cut, but forget, or want to forget, the crime that this hand committed, and the permanent negative effect on the public peace and the evil that the crime entails. They take pity on the criminal and not on the victim.

It should be noted that the Prophet was not a violent or cruel man. Our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a righteous man who strove intensely for justice, and everything he did was in accordance with the commandments of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a man of great qualities. People, even who hated him, saw in him exceptional qualities. He was, as the Qur’an eloquently states, a man of exalted character:

“You are of a great nature and morals.” (al-Qalam 68: 4)

In all of the cases where hand amputation punishment is not implemented, the rights of the victim must also be protected. Then, the thief has to pay for a compensation fee and another fee as punishment. This is called “muqabalah bi’l mithl = equivalent retaliation”. Please see the following link about this:

http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/on-what-circumstances-the-hand-of-a-thief-should-be-cut-off.html
...}

Were the hands of thieves cut off at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? - Islam and the Quran

The verses on the punishment of theft are as follows: .وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ “Cut off...

www.islamandquran.org

1. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in Israel for the crime of theft?

2. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in nearby Saudi Arabia for the crime of theft?

------

Your Honor... the Prosecution rests.

Amputation is extremely rare in Arabia. Its the punished for three convictions for grand larceny.

Define “extremely rare”…how many gay bars are there in “Arabia”? How about bars in general for locals?

 

[surada]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

Checkmate

Wrong.
The penalties for theft, like cutting off a hand, comes from Judaism, not Mohammad.

9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

{...
Matthew 5:30
If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matthew 18:8
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

2 Samuel 4:12
Then David commanded the young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and hung them up beside the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner in Hebron.

Deuteronomy 25:12
then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,

Proverbs 26:6
He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence
Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.

1 Samuel 5:4
But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.

Judges 1:6
But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.

Judges 1:7
Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet
...}

But Mohammad allows for so many ways to avoid it, that it likely never happened.
For example, all the thief has to do is pay compensation for what was stolen.

{...
Below are some of the restriction on the punishment of cutting off the hand of a thief:

• This penalty can only be prescribed by a judge. Therefore, either the owner of the property or other eyewitnesses must apply to the authorities for the judgment first.
• To be able to mention this penalty, the stolen property must be somewhere preserved. If the stolen property was not in a preserved area, the crime is not qualified as theft and the punishment is not implemented.
• Nobody’s hand can be cut off if a person or his/her family for whom he/she is responsible to take care of was starving and therefore stole food. In other words, if their life was in danger, the hand amputation punishment is not implemented.
• None of God’s verses address the children. That clearly means: children are not liable towards God. Their parents or guardians are responsible to teach them what is good or bad, what is lawful or forbidden, until they reach puberty. Then, when they reach the puberty, they become responsible for complying with God’s commands and prohibitions. So, a child who has not reached the puberty cannot be judged by the criminal law for his misdeeds, let alone having his/her hand cut off.
• If the crime was committed in threat of life or under any other type of coercion, the punishment is not implemented.
• If there are no witnesses and the thief himself/herself admits the crime and repents before being caught, the penalty is not implemented.

Still, some ignorant people rush to judge the laws of Islamic Shari’ah, their penalties and sentences as harsh. They grieve for the hand that is cut, but forget, or want to forget, the crime that this hand committed, and the permanent negative effect on the public peace and the evil that the crime entails. They take pity on the criminal and not on the victim.

It should be noted that the Prophet was not a violent or cruel man. Our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a righteous man who strove intensely for justice, and everything he did was in accordance with the commandments of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a man of great qualities. People, even who hated him, saw in him exceptional qualities. He was, as the Qur’an eloquently states, a man of exalted character:

“You are of a great nature and morals.” (al-Qalam 68: 4)

In all of the cases where hand amputation punishment is not implemented, the rights of the victim must also be protected. Then, the thief has to pay for a compensation fee and another fee as punishment. This is called “muqabalah bi’l mithl = equivalent retaliation”. Please see the following link about this:

http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/on-what-circumstances-the-hand-of-a-thief-should-be-cut-off.html
...}

Were the hands of thieves cut off at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? - Islam and the Quran

The verses on the punishment of theft are as follows: .وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ “Cut off...

www.islamandquran.org

1. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in Israel for the crime of theft?

2. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in nearby Saudi Arabia for the crime of theft?

------

Your Honor... the Prosecution rests.

Amputation is extremely rare in Arabia. Its the punished for three convictions for grand larceny.

Define “extremely rare”…how many gay bars are there in “Arabia”? How about bars in general for locals?

The only bars in Saudi Arabia are underground in private homes.

 

[irosie91]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

funny you bring up the TEN COMMANDMENTS thing, surada. Try asking a muslim ---"what are the ten commandments"------find it amazing if you can recite them. As to the "GOLDEN RULE"--
it is true that what christians have called "the golden rule" is noted in the Koran but not
the fact that it came From Hillel and the talmud. Muhummad's SUCCESSORS ---even his most
immediate

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

war lord in ARABIA------the fashionable thing at that time for arabs was TRIBAL WARFARE.
In general ---in my experience----muslims do not know the TEN COMMANDMENTS. What
surada calls the Golden rule was authored by the Talmudist HILLEL but is attributed to
christians by muslims and is a SUBJECT OF EXTREME SCORN

The ten commandments and the Golden Rule are all in the Koran.. You'd know that if you'd read it.

Your desperation to vilify Muslims and Islam and Muhammed is a shameful attempt to justify theft and murder.

Why the hell didn't you stand up and fight the people who persecuted you in Europe and Russia?

I was born in the USA. None of the highly educated muslims I have met in the USA
ever read the koran-----not in arabic ----nor in their native languages --some FARSI and
some URDU. I read the koran------the "golden rule" is lightly alluded to and the ten
commandments are all but ignored. Easy to understand why muslims do not seem to know
them. Just as shariah law DENIES THE RIGHT OF JEWS to own or use any of the standard
implements of self defense----to wit weapons and horses (and camels) so did the Canon
law of Europe. How did you get so ignorant? You seem about at the level of most of
the catholic school kids I grew up with-------they read neither the OT or the NT and never heard
of the koran. Theft and murder are, INDEED, justified in the koran. Try reading the book

Nothing could quash the OT Hebrews against other Middle Easterners, nothing.

Penny, AGAIN, writes a nothing post-----if only nothing could "quash" them,
her gang certainly TRIED----and counting

 

[Penelope]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

No Jesus of Nazareth is not a historical figure. A common name, look at the Jews let Yeshua Bar ʾAbbago go, Jesus of a common name back then.

Oh, bull$hit... there is PLENTY of Roman -era commentary stipulating his existence and trial and execution...

Not really, there were many talking preaching Jesus's at the time.

 

[surada]

Rigby5

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

Checkmate

Wrong.
The penalties for theft, like cutting off a hand, comes from Judaism, not Mohammad.

9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

{...
Matthew 5:30
If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matthew 18:8
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

2 Samuel 4:12
Then David commanded the young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and hung them up beside the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner in Hebron.

Deuteronomy 25:12
then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,

Proverbs 26:6
He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence
Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.

1 Samuel 5:4
But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.

Judges 1:6
But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.

Judges 1:7
Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet
...}

But Mohammad allows for so many ways to avoid it, that it likely never happened.
For example, all the thief has to do is pay compensation for what was stolen.

{...
Below are some of the restriction on the punishment of cutting off the hand of a thief:

• This penalty can only be prescribed by a judge. Therefore, either the owner of the property or other eyewitnesses must apply to the authorities for the judgment first.
• To be able to mention this penalty, the stolen property must be somewhere preserved. If the stolen property was not in a preserved area, the crime is not qualified as theft and the punishment is not implemented.
• Nobody’s hand can be cut off if a person or his/her family for whom he/she is responsible to take care of was starving and therefore stole food. In other words, if their life was in danger, the hand amputation punishment is not implemented.
• None of God’s verses address the children. That clearly means: children are not liable towards God. Their parents or guardians are responsible to teach them what is good or bad, what is lawful or forbidden, until they reach puberty. Then, when they reach the puberty, they become responsible for complying with God’s commands and prohibitions. So, a child who has not reached the puberty cannot be judged by the criminal law for his misdeeds, let alone having his/her hand cut off.
• If the crime was committed in threat of life or under any other type of coercion, the punishment is not implemented.
• If there are no witnesses and the thief himself/herself admits the crime and repents before being caught, the penalty is not implemented.

Still, some ignorant people rush to judge the laws of Islamic Shari’ah, their penalties and sentences as harsh. They grieve for the hand that is cut, but forget, or want to forget, the crime that this hand committed, and the permanent negative effect on the public peace and the evil that the crime entails. They take pity on the criminal and not on the victim.

It should be noted that the Prophet was not a violent or cruel man. Our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a righteous man who strove intensely for justice, and everything he did was in accordance with the commandments of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a man of great qualities. People, even who hated him, saw in him exceptional qualities. He was, as the Qur’an eloquently states, a man of exalted character:

“You are of a great nature and morals.” (al-Qalam 68: 4)

In all of the cases where hand amputation punishment is not implemented, the rights of the victim must also be protected. Then, the thief has to pay for a compensation fee and another fee as punishment. This is called “muqabalah bi’l mithl = equivalent retaliation”. Please see the following link about this:

http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/on-what-circumstances-the-hand-of-a-thief-should-be-cut-off.html
...}

Were the hands of thieves cut off at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? - Islam and the Quran

The verses on the punishment of theft are as follows: .وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ “Cut off...

www.islamandquran.org

1. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in Israel for the crime of theft?

2. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in nearby Saudi Arabia for the crime of theft?

------

Your Honor... the Prosecution rests.

Amputation is extremely rare in Arabia. Its the punished for three convictions for grand larceny.

It's not a matter of how RARE it is... the point is that it happens AT ALL... on an OFFICIAL basis... phukking Neanderthals...

We also have capital puishment in the US.. Beheading is instantaneous. They don't have a lot of prisons.. or crime. The Saudi courts are more pro victim than the US

 

[irosie91]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

Checkmate

Wrong.
The penalties for theft, like cutting off a hand, comes from Judaism, not Mohammad.

9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

{...
Matthew 5:30
If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matthew 18:8
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

2 Samuel 4:12
Then David commanded the young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and hung them up beside the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner in Hebron.

Deuteronomy 25:12
then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,

Proverbs 26:6
He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence
Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.

1 Samuel 5:4
But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.

Judges 1:6
But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.

Judges 1:7
Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet
...}

But Mohammad allows for so many ways to avoid it, that it likely never happened.
For example, all the thief has to do is pay compensation for what was stolen.

{...
Below are some of the restriction on the punishment of cutting off the hand of a thief:

• This penalty can only be prescribed by a judge. Therefore, either the owner of the property or other eyewitnesses must apply to the authorities for the judgment first.
• To be able to mention this penalty, the stolen property must be somewhere preserved. If the stolen property was not in a preserved area, the crime is not qualified as theft and the punishment is not implemented.
• Nobody’s hand can be cut off if a person or his/her family for whom he/she is responsible to take care of was starving and therefore stole food. In other words, if their life was in danger, the hand amputation punishment is not implemented.
• None of God’s verses address the children. That clearly means: children are not liable towards God. Their parents or guardians are responsible to teach them what is good or bad, what is lawful or forbidden, until they reach puberty. Then, when they reach the puberty, they become responsible for complying with God’s commands and prohibitions. So, a child who has not reached the puberty cannot be judged by the criminal law for his misdeeds, let alone having his/her hand cut off.
• If the crime was committed in threat of life or under any other type of coercion, the punishment is not implemented.
• If there are no witnesses and the thief himself/herself admits the crime and repents before being caught, the penalty is not implemented.

Still, some ignorant people rush to judge the laws of Islamic Shari’ah, their penalties and sentences as harsh. They grieve for the hand that is cut, but forget, or want to forget, the crime that this hand committed, and the permanent negative effect on the public peace and the evil that the crime entails. They take pity on the criminal and not on the victim.

It should be noted that the Prophet was not a violent or cruel man. Our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a righteous man who strove intensely for justice, and everything he did was in accordance with the commandments of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a man of great qualities. People, even who hated him, saw in him exceptional qualities. He was, as the Qur’an eloquently states, a man of exalted character:

“You are of a great nature and morals.” (al-Qalam 68: 4)

In all of the cases where hand amputation punishment is not implemented, the rights of the victim must also be protected. Then, the thief has to pay for a compensation fee and another fee as punishment. This is called “muqabalah bi’l mithl = equivalent retaliation”. Please see the following link about this:

http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/on-what-circumstances-the-hand-of-a-thief-should-be-cut-off.html
...}

Were the hands of thieves cut off at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? - Islam and the Quran

The verses on the punishment of theft are as follows: .وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ “Cut off...

www.islamandquran.org

1. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in Israel for the crime of theft?

2. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in nearby Saudi Arabia for the crime of theft?

------

Your Honor... the Prosecution rests.

Amputation is extremely rare in Arabia. Its the punished for three convictions for grand larceny.

Define “extremely rare”…how many gay bars are there in “Arabia”? How about bars in general for locals?

The only bars in Saudi Arabia are underground in private homes.

a personal anecdote. When I was working, a colleague of mine mentioned an incident in his
native JORDAN (he was christian Jordanian) -----he described a BAR in AMMAN ----I said
"There are BARS in Amman? " he answered "OF COURSE"----"for christians?" "more muslims
than christians" then he described a friend of his who would IMMEDIATELY order two drinks and say "ONE FOR ALLAH AND ONE FOR ME" It was an opened situation. In the shariah shit hole in which my hubby was born, jews made their own wine and OFTEN used it to bargain
for their own lives against "THIRSTY" muslims. One of the libels often used to Justify
the pogroms was that WINE TRANSACTION

Rigby5

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

Checkmate

Wrong.
The penalties for theft, like cutting off a hand, comes from Judaism, not Mohammad.

9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

{...
Matthew 5:30
If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matthew 18:8
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

2 Samuel 4:12
Then David commanded the young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and hung them up beside the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner in Hebron.

Deuteronomy 25:12
then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,

Proverbs 26:6
He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence
Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.

1 Samuel 5:4
But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.

Judges 1:6
But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.

Judges 1:7
Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet
...}

But Mohammad allows for so many ways to avoid it, that it likely never happened.
For example, all the thief has to do is pay compensation for what was stolen.

{...
Below are some of the restriction on the punishment of cutting off the hand of a thief:

• This penalty can only be prescribed by a judge. Therefore, either the owner of the property or other eyewitnesses must apply to the authorities for the judgment first.
• To be able to mention this penalty, the stolen property must be somewhere preserved. If the stolen property was not in a preserved area, the crime is not qualified as theft and the punishment is not implemented.
• Nobody’s hand can be cut off if a person or his/her family for whom he/she is responsible to take care of was starving and therefore stole food. In other words, if their life was in danger, the hand amputation punishment is not implemented.
• None of God’s verses address the children. That clearly means: children are not liable towards God. Their parents or guardians are responsible to teach them what is good or bad, what is lawful or forbidden, until they reach puberty. Then, when they reach the puberty, they become responsible for complying with God’s commands and prohibitions. So, a child who has not reached the puberty cannot be judged by the criminal law for his misdeeds, let alone having his/her hand cut off.
• If the crime was committed in threat of life or under any other type of coercion, the punishment is not implemented.
• If there are no witnesses and the thief himself/herself admits the crime and repents before being caught, the penalty is not implemented.

Still, some ignorant people rush to judge the laws of Islamic Shari’ah, their penalties and sentences as harsh. They grieve for the hand that is cut, but forget, or want to forget, the crime that this hand committed, and the permanent negative effect on the public peace and the evil that the crime entails. They take pity on the criminal and not on the victim.

It should be noted that the Prophet was not a violent or cruel man. Our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a righteous man who strove intensely for justice, and everything he did was in accordance with the commandments of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a man of great qualities. People, even who hated him, saw in him exceptional qualities. He was, as the Qur’an eloquently states, a man of exalted character:

“You are of a great nature and morals.” (al-Qalam 68: 4)

In all of the cases where hand amputation punishment is not implemented, the rights of the victim must also be protected. Then, the thief has to pay for a compensation fee and another fee as punishment. This is called “muqabalah bi’l mithl = equivalent retaliation”. Please see the following link about this:

http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/on-what-circumstances-the-hand-of-a-thief-should-be-cut-off.html
...}

Were the hands of thieves cut off at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? - Islam and the Quran

The verses on the punishment of theft are as follows: .وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ “Cut off...

www.islamandquran.org

1. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in Israel for the crime of theft?

2. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in nearby Saudi Arabia for the crime of theft?

------

Your Honor... the Prosecution rests.

Amputation is extremely rare in Arabia. Its the punished for three convictions for grand larceny.

It's not a matter of how RARE it is... the point is that it happens AT ALL... on an OFFICIAL basis... phukking Neanderthals...

We also have capital puishment in the US.. Beheading is instantaneous. They don't have a lot of prisons.. or crime. The Saudi courts are more pro victim than the US

the courts in the shariah shit hole system are PRO ISLAM. Saudi arabia is not much of an \
issue since everyone is a muslim----but in those countries with a non muslim minority--a MUSLIM can get away with anything. Remember the person DANIEL PEARL whom the brave ass lickers
of muhummad murdered by slitting his throat? The murdering dogs were put on trial in a
SPERCIAL non muslim court----WHY? --because in an islamic court, Killing a jew is legal.
The pakistani government tried to avoid embarassment------but---lately the murdering dogs
have been exonerated as per islamic law. For further enlightenment read the koran

 

[surada]

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

Checkmate

Wrong.
The penalties for theft, like cutting off a hand, comes from Judaism, not Mohammad.

9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

{...
Matthew 5:30
If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matthew 18:8
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

2 Samuel 4:12
Then David commanded the young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and hung them up beside the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner in Hebron.

Deuteronomy 25:12
then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,

Proverbs 26:6
He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence
Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.

1 Samuel 5:4
But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.

Judges 1:6
But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.

Judges 1:7
Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet
...}

But Mohammad allows for so many ways to avoid it, that it likely never happened.
For example, all the thief has to do is pay compensation for what was stolen.

{...
Below are some of the restriction on the punishment of cutting off the hand of a thief:

• This penalty can only be prescribed by a judge. Therefore, either the owner of the property or other eyewitnesses must apply to the authorities for the judgment first.
• To be able to mention this penalty, the stolen property must be somewhere preserved. If the stolen property was not in a preserved area, the crime is not qualified as theft and the punishment is not implemented.
• Nobody’s hand can be cut off if a person or his/her family for whom he/she is responsible to take care of was starving and therefore stole food. In other words, if their life was in danger, the hand amputation punishment is not implemented.
• None of God’s verses address the children. That clearly means: children are not liable towards God. Their parents or guardians are responsible to teach them what is good or bad, what is lawful or forbidden, until they reach puberty. Then, when they reach the puberty, they become responsible for complying with God’s commands and prohibitions. So, a child who has not reached the puberty cannot be judged by the criminal law for his misdeeds, let alone having his/her hand cut off.
• If the crime was committed in threat of life or under any other type of coercion, the punishment is not implemented.
• If there are no witnesses and the thief himself/herself admits the crime and repents before being caught, the penalty is not implemented.

Still, some ignorant people rush to judge the laws of Islamic Shari’ah, their penalties and sentences as harsh. They grieve for the hand that is cut, but forget, or want to forget, the crime that this hand committed, and the permanent negative effect on the public peace and the evil that the crime entails. They take pity on the criminal and not on the victim.

It should be noted that the Prophet was not a violent or cruel man. Our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a righteous man who strove intensely for justice, and everything he did was in accordance with the commandments of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a man of great qualities. People, even who hated him, saw in him exceptional qualities. He was, as the Qur’an eloquently states, a man of exalted character:

“You are of a great nature and morals.” (al-Qalam 68: 4)

In all of the cases where hand amputation punishment is not implemented, the rights of the victim must also be protected. Then, the thief has to pay for a compensation fee and another fee as punishment. This is called “muqabalah bi’l mithl = equivalent retaliation”. Please see the following link about this:

http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/on-what-circumstances-the-hand-of-a-thief-should-be-cut-off.html
...}

Were the hands of thieves cut off at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? - Islam and the Quran

The verses on the punishment of theft are as follows: .وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ “Cut off...

www.islamandquran.org

1. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in Israel for the crime of theft?

2. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in nearby Saudi Arabia for the crime of theft?

------

Your Honor... the Prosecution rests.

Amputation is extremely rare in Arabia. Its the punished for three convictions for grand larceny.

Define “extremely rare”…how many gay bars are there in “Arabia”? How about bars in general for locals?

The only bars in Saudi Arabia are underground in private homes.

a personal anecdote. When I was working, a colleague of mine mentioned an incident in his
native JORDAN (he was christian Jordanian) -----he described a BAR in AMMAN ----I said
"There are BARS in Amman? " he answered "OF COURSE"----"for christians?" "more muslims
than christians" then he described a friend of his who would IMMEDIATELY order two drinks and say "ONE FOR ALLAH AND ONE FOR ME" It was an opened situation. In the shariah shit hole in which my hubby was born, jews made their own wine and OFTEN used it to bargain
for their own lives against "THIRSTY" muslims. One of the libels often used to Justify
the pogroms was that WINE TRANSACTION

Rigby5

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

Checkmate

Wrong.
The penalties for theft, like cutting off a hand, comes from Judaism, not Mohammad.

9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

{...
Matthew 5:30
If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matthew 18:8
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

2 Samuel 4:12
Then David commanded the young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and hung them up beside the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner in Hebron.

Deuteronomy 25:12
then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,

Proverbs 26:6
He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence
Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.

1 Samuel 5:4
But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.

Judges 1:6
But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.

Judges 1:7
Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet
...}

But Mohammad allows for so many ways to avoid it, that it likely never happened.
For example, all the thief has to do is pay compensation for what was stolen.

{...
Below are some of the restriction on the punishment of cutting off the hand of a thief:

• This penalty can only be prescribed by a judge. Therefore, either the owner of the property or other eyewitnesses must apply to the authorities for the judgment first.
• To be able to mention this penalty, the stolen property must be somewhere preserved. If the stolen property was not in a preserved area, the crime is not qualified as theft and the punishment is not implemented.
• Nobody’s hand can be cut off if a person or his/her family for whom he/she is responsible to take care of was starving and therefore stole food. In other words, if their life was in danger, the hand amputation punishment is not implemented.
• None of God’s verses address the children. That clearly means: children are not liable towards God. Their parents or guardians are responsible to teach them what is good or bad, what is lawful or forbidden, until they reach puberty. Then, when they reach the puberty, they become responsible for complying with God’s commands and prohibitions. So, a child who has not reached the puberty cannot be judged by the criminal law for his misdeeds, let alone having his/her hand cut off.
• If the crime was committed in threat of life or under any other type of coercion, the punishment is not implemented.
• If there are no witnesses and the thief himself/herself admits the crime and repents before being caught, the penalty is not implemented.

Still, some ignorant people rush to judge the laws of Islamic Shari’ah, their penalties and sentences as harsh. They grieve for the hand that is cut, but forget, or want to forget, the crime that this hand committed, and the permanent negative effect on the public peace and the evil that the crime entails. They take pity on the criminal and not on the victim.

It should be noted that the Prophet was not a violent or cruel man. Our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a righteous man who strove intensely for justice, and everything he did was in accordance with the commandments of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a man of great qualities. People, even who hated him, saw in him exceptional qualities. He was, as the Qur’an eloquently states, a man of exalted character:

“You are of a great nature and morals.” (al-Qalam 68: 4)

In all of the cases where hand amputation punishment is not implemented, the rights of the victim must also be protected. Then, the thief has to pay for a compensation fee and another fee as punishment. This is called “muqabalah bi’l mithl = equivalent retaliation”. Please see the following link about this:

http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/on-what-circumstances-the-hand-of-a-thief-should-be-cut-off.html
...}

Were the hands of thieves cut off at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? - Islam and the Quran

The verses on the punishment of theft are as follows: .وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ “Cut off...

www.islamandquran.org

1. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in Israel for the crime of theft?

2. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in nearby Saudi Arabia for the crime of theft?

------

Your Honor... the Prosecution rests.

Amputation is extremely rare in Arabia. Its the punished for three convictions for grand larceny.

It's not a matter of how RARE it is... the point is that it happens AT ALL... on an OFFICIAL basis... phukking Neanderthals...

We also have capital puishment in the US.. Beheading is instantaneous. They don't have a lot of prisons.. or crime. The Saudi courts are more pro victim than the US

the courts in the shariah shit hole system are PRO ISLAM. Saudi arabia is not much of an \
issue since everyone is a muslim----but in those countries with a non muslim minority--a MUSLIM can get away with anything. Remember the person DANIEL PEARL whom the brave ass lickers
of muhummad murdered by slitting his throat? The murdering dogs were put on trial in a
SPERCIAL non muslim court----WHY? --because in an islamic court, Killing a jew is legal.
The pakistani government tried to avoid embarassment------but---lately the murdering dogs
have been exonerated as per islamic law. For further enlightenment read the koran

They have always sold wine and spirits in Jordan. Haven't you been there?

 

[rylah]

Rashida is rooted in antisemitism...

Tlaib Says Opposition to Critical Race Theory Is ‘Rooted in Racism’

The theory holds that America is fundamentally racist, yet it teaches people to view every social interaction and person in terms of race.

www.dailysignal.com

Why are you obsessed with the idea that everyone in American government must be a fan of the Israeli government. Is Talib not entitled to her own opinion based on her own experiences with the Israelis?

Many Israeli’s find the behaviour of the Netanyahu government towards the Palestinians to be offensive and racist.

You seem to have no problem hating on anyone who doesn’t think like you do or look like you do and we are all supposed to except these ideas is being your constitutional right to freedom of speech and freedom of association.

There are lots of minority male in the Progressive Caucus, who do not support Israel as well.

Why is it that the Trump Cult consistently and falsely attack and slander House Members who are both female and are women of color?

The women are crazy. The women are stupid. Crazy Nancy. Crazy Maxine. What is it about strong smart women that frightens you so?

I don't know any Israelis who find the Netanyahu government "RACIST" toward the
"palestinians" (of course you might find one or two to prove your "rule") "arab"
is not a race. As to people in the USA government. lots of them are racist.
Maxine Waters-----not my cup of tea-----you may find her charming, I am a registered
democrat and consider her to be a NUT.
The term WOMEN OF COLOR is even more idiotic than the use of the term "palestinian"
for arab muslims. Does TRUMP seem to you to be the first POLITICIAN to disparage
political opponents. You should read some of the Editorials from the LINCOLN ERA

That is silly because Netanyahu is Ashkenazi, so then would be racist against native Arabs, but since most Israelis are also Ashkenazi, they would not think what Netanyahu does is wrong. They would be equally racist.
And the victim of racism does not have to be a different race.
Hitler was the same race as the Jews he killed.

Indeed this is silly,
because the Pali Arabs came from the same countries that Jews come from,
since in fact, most Israelis a descendants of former Dhimmis expelled from the Middle East.

But thanks for summing up your racist cretincy once again,
if anyone wonders about the centuries of abysmal degradation in the Arab world
here you've got it all demonstrated wonderfully, at least for that a broken clock works well.

 

[irosie91]

surada

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

Checkmate

Wrong.
The penalties for theft, like cutting off a hand, comes from Judaism, not Mohammad.

9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

{...
Matthew 5:30
If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matthew 18:8
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

2 Samuel 4:12
Then David commanded the young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and hung them up beside the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner in Hebron.

Deuteronomy 25:12
then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,

Proverbs 26:6
He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence
Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.

1 Samuel 5:4
But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.

Judges 1:6
But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.

Judges 1:7
Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet
...}

But Mohammad allows for so many ways to avoid it, that it likely never happened.
For example, all the thief has to do is pay compensation for what was stolen.

{...
Below are some of the restriction on the punishment of cutting off the hand of a thief:

• This penalty can only be prescribed by a judge. Therefore, either the owner of the property or other eyewitnesses must apply to the authorities for the judgment first.
• To be able to mention this penalty, the stolen property must be somewhere preserved. If the stolen property was not in a preserved area, the crime is not qualified as theft and the punishment is not implemented.
• Nobody’s hand can be cut off if a person or his/her family for whom he/she is responsible to take care of was starving and therefore stole food. In other words, if their life was in danger, the hand amputation punishment is not implemented.
• None of God’s verses address the children. That clearly means: children are not liable towards God. Their parents or guardians are responsible to teach them what is good or bad, what is lawful or forbidden, until they reach puberty. Then, when they reach the puberty, they become responsible for complying with God’s commands and prohibitions. So, a child who has not reached the puberty cannot be judged by the criminal law for his misdeeds, let alone having his/her hand cut off.
• If the crime was committed in threat of life or under any other type of coercion, the punishment is not implemented.
• If there are no witnesses and the thief himself/herself admits the crime and repents before being caught, the penalty is not implemented.

Still, some ignorant people rush to judge the laws of Islamic Shari’ah, their penalties and sentences as harsh. They grieve for the hand that is cut, but forget, or want to forget, the crime that this hand committed, and the permanent negative effect on the public peace and the evil that the crime entails. They take pity on the criminal and not on the victim.

It should be noted that the Prophet was not a violent or cruel man. Our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a righteous man who strove intensely for justice, and everything he did was in accordance with the commandments of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a man of great qualities. People, even who hated him, saw in him exceptional qualities. He was, as the Qur’an eloquently states, a man of exalted character:

“You are of a great nature and morals.” (al-Qalam 68: 4)

In all of the cases where hand amputation punishment is not implemented, the rights of the victim must also be protected. Then, the thief has to pay for a compensation fee and another fee as punishment. This is called “muqabalah bi’l mithl = equivalent retaliation”. Please see the following link about this:

http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/on-what-circumstances-the-hand-of-a-thief-should-be-cut-off.html
...}

Were the hands of thieves cut off at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? - Islam and the Quran

The verses on the punishment of theft are as follows: .وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ “Cut off...

www.islamandquran.org

1. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in Israel for the crime of theft?

2. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in nearby Saudi Arabia for the crime of theft?

------

Your Honor... the Prosecution rests.

Amputation is extremely rare in Arabia. Its the punished for three convictions for grand larceny.

Define “extremely rare”…how many gay bars are there in “Arabia”? How about bars in general for locals?

The only bars in Saudi Arabia are underground in private homes.

a personal anecdote. When I was working, a colleague of mine mentioned an incident in his
native JORDAN (he was christian Jordanian) -----he described a BAR in AMMAN ----I said
"There are BARS in Amman? " he answered "OF COURSE"----"for christians?" "more muslims
than christians" then he described a friend of his who would IMMEDIATELY order two drinks and say "ONE FOR ALLAH AND ONE FOR ME" It was an opened situation. In the shariah shit hole in which my hubby was born, jews made their own wine and OFTEN used it to bargain
for their own lives against "THIRSTY" muslims. One of the libels often used to Justify
the pogroms was that WINE TRANSACTION

Rigby5

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

Checkmate

Wrong.
The penalties for theft, like cutting off a hand, comes from Judaism, not Mohammad.

9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

{...
Matthew 5:30
If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matthew 18:8
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

2 Samuel 4:12
Then David commanded the young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and hung them up beside the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner in Hebron.

Deuteronomy 25:12
then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,

Proverbs 26:6
He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence
Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.

1 Samuel 5:4
But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.

Judges 1:6
But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.

Judges 1:7
Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet
...}

But Mohammad allows for so many ways to avoid it, that it likely never happened.
For example, all the thief has to do is pay compensation for what was stolen.

{...
Below are some of the restriction on the punishment of cutting off the hand of a thief:

• This penalty can only be prescribed by a judge. Therefore, either the owner of the property or other eyewitnesses must apply to the authorities for the judgment first.
• To be able to mention this penalty, the stolen property must be somewhere preserved. If the stolen property was not in a preserved area, the crime is not qualified as theft and the punishment is not implemented.
• Nobody’s hand can be cut off if a person or his/her family for whom he/she is responsible to take care of was starving and therefore stole food. In other words, if their life was in danger, the hand amputation punishment is not implemented.
• None of God’s verses address the children. That clearly means: children are not liable towards God. Their parents or guardians are responsible to teach them what is good or bad, what is lawful or forbidden, until they reach puberty. Then, when they reach the puberty, they become responsible for complying with God’s commands and prohibitions. So, a child who has not reached the puberty cannot be judged by the criminal law for his misdeeds, let alone having his/her hand cut off.
• If the crime was committed in threat of life or under any other type of coercion, the punishment is not implemented.
• If there are no witnesses and the thief himself/herself admits the crime and repents before being caught, the penalty is not implemented.

Still, some ignorant people rush to judge the laws of Islamic Shari’ah, their penalties and sentences as harsh. They grieve for the hand that is cut, but forget, or want to forget, the crime that this hand committed, and the permanent negative effect on the public peace and the evil that the crime entails. They take pity on the criminal and not on the victim.

It should be noted that the Prophet was not a violent or cruel man. Our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a righteous man who strove intensely for justice, and everything he did was in accordance with the commandments of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a man of great qualities. People, even who hated him, saw in him exceptional qualities. He was, as the Qur’an eloquently states, a man of exalted character:

“You are of a great nature and morals.” (al-Qalam 68: 4)

In all of the cases where hand amputation punishment is not implemented, the rights of the victim must also be protected. Then, the thief has to pay for a compensation fee and another fee as punishment. This is called “muqabalah bi’l mithl = equivalent retaliation”. Please see the following link about this:

http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/on-what-circumstances-the-hand-of-a-thief-should-be-cut-off.html
...}

Were the hands of thieves cut off at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? - Islam and the Quran

The verses on the punishment of theft are as follows: .وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ “Cut off...

www.islamandquran.org

1. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in Israel for the crime of theft?

2. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in nearby Saudi Arabia for the crime of theft?

------

Your Honor... the Prosecution rests.

Amputation is extremely rare in Arabia. Its the punished for three convictions for grand larceny.

It's not a matter of how RARE it is... the point is that it happens AT ALL... on an OFFICIAL basis... phukking Neanderthals...

We also have capital puishment in the US.. Beheading is instantaneous. They don't have a lot of prisons.. or crime. The Saudi courts are more pro victim than the US

the courts in the shariah shit hole system are PRO ISLAM. Saudi arabia is not much of an \
issue since everyone is a muslim----but in those countries with a non muslim minority--a MUSLIM can get away with anything. Remember the person DANIEL PEARL whom the brave ass lickers
of muhummad murdered by slitting his throat? The murdering dogs were put on trial in a
SPERCIAL non muslim court----WHY? --because in an islamic court, Killing a jew is legal.
The pakistani government tried to avoid embarassment------but---lately the murdering dogs
have been exonerated as per islamic law. For further enlightenment read the koran

They have always sold wine and spirits in Jordan. Haven't you been there?

no I have never been to Jordan-----your inquiry seems silly to me. I have never been
to saudi arabia either---or pakistan, or India I am not a world TRAVELER_----
I have very confidential information from people from just about all over the world
right here in the USA. From your posts I have a strong impression that you imagine
that sipping tea in the parlor as a guest is ENLIGHTENING as to culture and opinions and
FACT

 

[surada]

surada

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

Checkmate

Wrong.
The penalties for theft, like cutting off a hand, comes from Judaism, not Mohammad.

9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

{...
Matthew 5:30
If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matthew 18:8
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

2 Samuel 4:12
Then David commanded the young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and hung them up beside the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner in Hebron.

Deuteronomy 25:12
then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,

Proverbs 26:6
He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence
Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.

1 Samuel 5:4
But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.

Judges 1:6
But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.

Judges 1:7
Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet
...}

But Mohammad allows for so many ways to avoid it, that it likely never happened.
For example, all the thief has to do is pay compensation for what was stolen.

{...
Below are some of the restriction on the punishment of cutting off the hand of a thief:

• This penalty can only be prescribed by a judge. Therefore, either the owner of the property or other eyewitnesses must apply to the authorities for the judgment first.
• To be able to mention this penalty, the stolen property must be somewhere preserved. If the stolen property was not in a preserved area, the crime is not qualified as theft and the punishment is not implemented.
• Nobody’s hand can be cut off if a person or his/her family for whom he/she is responsible to take care of was starving and therefore stole food. In other words, if their life was in danger, the hand amputation punishment is not implemented.
• None of God’s verses address the children. That clearly means: children are not liable towards God. Their parents or guardians are responsible to teach them what is good or bad, what is lawful or forbidden, until they reach puberty. Then, when they reach the puberty, they become responsible for complying with God’s commands and prohibitions. So, a child who has not reached the puberty cannot be judged by the criminal law for his misdeeds, let alone having his/her hand cut off.
• If the crime was committed in threat of life or under any other type of coercion, the punishment is not implemented.
• If there are no witnesses and the thief himself/herself admits the crime and repents before being caught, the penalty is not implemented.

Still, some ignorant people rush to judge the laws of Islamic Shari’ah, their penalties and sentences as harsh. They grieve for the hand that is cut, but forget, or want to forget, the crime that this hand committed, and the permanent negative effect on the public peace and the evil that the crime entails. They take pity on the criminal and not on the victim.

It should be noted that the Prophet was not a violent or cruel man. Our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a righteous man who strove intensely for justice, and everything he did was in accordance with the commandments of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a man of great qualities. People, even who hated him, saw in him exceptional qualities. He was, as the Qur’an eloquently states, a man of exalted character:

“You are of a great nature and morals.” (al-Qalam 68: 4)

In all of the cases where hand amputation punishment is not implemented, the rights of the victim must also be protected. Then, the thief has to pay for a compensation fee and another fee as punishment. This is called “muqabalah bi’l mithl = equivalent retaliation”. Please see the following link about this:

http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/on-what-circumstances-the-hand-of-a-thief-should-be-cut-off.html
...}

Were the hands of thieves cut off at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? - Islam and the Quran

The verses on the punishment of theft are as follows: .وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ “Cut off...

www.islamandquran.org

1. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in Israel for the crime of theft?

2. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in nearby Saudi Arabia for the crime of theft?

------

Your Honor... the Prosecution rests.

Amputation is extremely rare in Arabia. Its the punished for three convictions for grand larceny.

Define “extremely rare”…how many gay bars are there in “Arabia”? How about bars in general for locals?

The only bars in Saudi Arabia are underground in private homes.

a personal anecdote. When I was working, a colleague of mine mentioned an incident in his
native JORDAN (he was christian Jordanian) -----he described a BAR in AMMAN ----I said
"There are BARS in Amman? " he answered "OF COURSE"----"for christians?" "more muslims
than christians" then he described a friend of his who would IMMEDIATELY order two drinks and say "ONE FOR ALLAH AND ONE FOR ME" It was an opened situation. In the shariah shit hole in which my hubby was born, jews made their own wine and OFTEN used it to bargain
for their own lives against "THIRSTY" muslims. One of the libels often used to Justify
the pogroms was that WINE TRANSACTION

Rigby5

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

Checkmate

Wrong.
The penalties for theft, like cutting off a hand, comes from Judaism, not Mohammad.

9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

{...
Matthew 5:30
If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matthew 18:8
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

2 Samuel 4:12
Then David commanded the young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and hung them up beside the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner in Hebron.

Deuteronomy 25:12
then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,

Proverbs 26:6
He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence
Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.

1 Samuel 5:4
But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.

Judges 1:6
But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.

Judges 1:7
Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet
...}

But Mohammad allows for so many ways to avoid it, that it likely never happened.
For example, all the thief has to do is pay compensation for what was stolen.

{...
Below are some of the restriction on the punishment of cutting off the hand of a thief:

• This penalty can only be prescribed by a judge. Therefore, either the owner of the property or other eyewitnesses must apply to the authorities for the judgment first.
• To be able to mention this penalty, the stolen property must be somewhere preserved. If the stolen property was not in a preserved area, the crime is not qualified as theft and the punishment is not implemented.
• Nobody’s hand can be cut off if a person or his/her family for whom he/she is responsible to take care of was starving and therefore stole food. In other words, if their life was in danger, the hand amputation punishment is not implemented.
• None of God’s verses address the children. That clearly means: children are not liable towards God. Their parents or guardians are responsible to teach them what is good or bad, what is lawful or forbidden, until they reach puberty. Then, when they reach the puberty, they become responsible for complying with God’s commands and prohibitions. So, a child who has not reached the puberty cannot be judged by the criminal law for his misdeeds, let alone having his/her hand cut off.
• If the crime was committed in threat of life or under any other type of coercion, the punishment is not implemented.
• If there are no witnesses and the thief himself/herself admits the crime and repents before being caught, the penalty is not implemented.

Still, some ignorant people rush to judge the laws of Islamic Shari’ah, their penalties and sentences as harsh. They grieve for the hand that is cut, but forget, or want to forget, the crime that this hand committed, and the permanent negative effect on the public peace and the evil that the crime entails. They take pity on the criminal and not on the victim.

It should be noted that the Prophet was not a violent or cruel man. Our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a righteous man who strove intensely for justice, and everything he did was in accordance with the commandments of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a man of great qualities. People, even who hated him, saw in him exceptional qualities. He was, as the Qur’an eloquently states, a man of exalted character:

“You are of a great nature and morals.” (al-Qalam 68: 4)

In all of the cases where hand amputation punishment is not implemented, the rights of the victim must also be protected. Then, the thief has to pay for a compensation fee and another fee as punishment. This is called “muqabalah bi’l mithl = equivalent retaliation”. Please see the following link about this:

http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/on-what-circumstances-the-hand-of-a-thief-should-be-cut-off.html
...}

Were the hands of thieves cut off at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? - Islam and the Quran

The verses on the punishment of theft are as follows: .وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ “Cut off...

www.islamandquran.org

1. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in Israel for the crime of theft?

2. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in nearby Saudi Arabia for the crime of theft?

------

Your Honor... the Prosecution rests.

Amputation is extremely rare in Arabia. Its the punished for three convictions for grand larceny.

It's not a matter of how RARE it is... the point is that it happens AT ALL... on an OFFICIAL basis... phukking Neanderthals...

We also have capital puishment in the US.. Beheading is instantaneous. They don't have a lot of prisons.. or crime. The Saudi courts are more pro victim than the US

the courts in the shariah shit hole system are PRO ISLAM. Saudi arabia is not much of an \
issue since everyone is a muslim----but in those countries with a non muslim minority--a MUSLIM can get away with anything. Remember the person DANIEL PEARL whom the brave ass lickers
of muhummad murdered by slitting his throat? The murdering dogs were put on trial in a
SPERCIAL non muslim court----WHY? --because in an islamic court, Killing a jew is legal.
The pakistani government tried to avoid embarassment------but---lately the murdering dogs
have been exonerated as per islamic law. For further enlightenment read the koran

They have always sold wine and spirits in Jordan. Haven't you been there?

no I have never been to Jordan-----your inquiry seems silly to me. I have never been
to saudi arabia either---or pakistan, or India I am not a world TRAVELER_----
I have very confidential information from people from just about all over the world
right here in the USA. From your posts I have a strong impression that you imagine
that sipping tea in the parlor as a guest is ENLIGHTENING as to culture and opinions and
FACT

I remember one trip to Jordan in April..It was cold and raining .. and I had cramps. I bought a bottle of red wine on the street.

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

The axis of evil (Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib) have such contempt for Jews and Israel, they can’t even pretend to hide it.

"Why not boycott Egypt?" Tapper asked. "They have human rights— "

"Oh, I would boycott Egypt of course!" Tlaib claimed.

"But you keep saying you 'would,' you 'would,' you 'would' boycott Egypt — but you're not," Tapper shot back.

Jake Tapper would have to ask twice if Israel had even a right just to exist.

Jake Tapper grills Rashida Tlaib on BDS, whether Israel has 'right to exist.' Here's what she said.

20 years ago, these 4 would be banished.

Folks. See how far 20 yrs of brainwashing have accumulated to? I can't believe how many dumb MFs there are here who believe their shit.

You got that one dingle berry here who has the Brother Fucker friend as an avatar, What a fucking dumb ass cock sucker. Good God you illegally marry your brother to come here. Look at the filth that idiot represents. i pray her district burns in July

 

[irosie91]

surada

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

Checkmate

Wrong.
The penalties for theft, like cutting off a hand, comes from Judaism, not Mohammad.

9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

{...
Matthew 5:30
If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matthew 18:8
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

2 Samuel 4:12
Then David commanded the young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and hung them up beside the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner in Hebron.

Deuteronomy 25:12
then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,

Proverbs 26:6
He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence
Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.

1 Samuel 5:4
But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.

Judges 1:6
But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.

Judges 1:7
Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet
...}

But Mohammad allows for so many ways to avoid it, that it likely never happened.
For example, all the thief has to do is pay compensation for what was stolen.

{...
Below are some of the restriction on the punishment of cutting off the hand of a thief:

• This penalty can only be prescribed by a judge. Therefore, either the owner of the property or other eyewitnesses must apply to the authorities for the judgment first.
• To be able to mention this penalty, the stolen property must be somewhere preserved. If the stolen property was not in a preserved area, the crime is not qualified as theft and the punishment is not implemented.
• Nobody’s hand can be cut off if a person or his/her family for whom he/she is responsible to take care of was starving and therefore stole food. In other words, if their life was in danger, the hand amputation punishment is not implemented.
• None of God’s verses address the children. That clearly means: children are not liable towards God. Their parents or guardians are responsible to teach them what is good or bad, what is lawful or forbidden, until they reach puberty. Then, when they reach the puberty, they become responsible for complying with God’s commands and prohibitions. So, a child who has not reached the puberty cannot be judged by the criminal law for his misdeeds, let alone having his/her hand cut off.
• If the crime was committed in threat of life or under any other type of coercion, the punishment is not implemented.
• If there are no witnesses and the thief himself/herself admits the crime and repents before being caught, the penalty is not implemented.

Still, some ignorant people rush to judge the laws of Islamic Shari’ah, their penalties and sentences as harsh. They grieve for the hand that is cut, but forget, or want to forget, the crime that this hand committed, and the permanent negative effect on the public peace and the evil that the crime entails. They take pity on the criminal and not on the victim.

It should be noted that the Prophet was not a violent or cruel man. Our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a righteous man who strove intensely for justice, and everything he did was in accordance with the commandments of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a man of great qualities. People, even who hated him, saw in him exceptional qualities. He was, as the Qur’an eloquently states, a man of exalted character:

“You are of a great nature and morals.” (al-Qalam 68: 4)

In all of the cases where hand amputation punishment is not implemented, the rights of the victim must also be protected. Then, the thief has to pay for a compensation fee and another fee as punishment. This is called “muqabalah bi’l mithl = equivalent retaliation”. Please see the following link about this:

http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/on-what-circumstances-the-hand-of-a-thief-should-be-cut-off.html
...}

Were the hands of thieves cut off at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? - Islam and the Quran

The verses on the punishment of theft are as follows: .وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ “Cut off...

www.islamandquran.org

1. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in Israel for the crime of theft?

2. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in nearby Saudi Arabia for the crime of theft?

------

Your Honor... the Prosecution rests.

Amputation is extremely rare in Arabia. Its the punished for three convictions for grand larceny.

Define “extremely rare”…how many gay bars are there in “Arabia”? How about bars in general for locals?

The only bars in Saudi Arabia are underground in private homes.

a personal anecdote. When I was working, a colleague of mine mentioned an incident in his
native JORDAN (he was christian Jordanian) -----he described a BAR in AMMAN ----I said
"There are BARS in Amman? " he answered "OF COURSE"----"for christians?" "more muslims
than christians" then he described a friend of his who would IMMEDIATELY order two drinks and say "ONE FOR ALLAH AND ONE FOR ME" It was an opened situation. In the shariah shit hole in which my hubby was born, jews made their own wine and OFTEN used it to bargain
for their own lives against "THIRSTY" muslims. One of the libels often used to Justify
the pogroms was that WINE TRANSACTION

Rigby5

"But understand does it exist in the detriment of inequality for the Palestinian people? The detriment of not moving forward in a peaceful resolution," she continued. "We're never going to have peace, I truly believe, if separate but equal is the way they want to go.

I quite agree. She comes from a Palestinian family what the hell do you expect her to say, the Jews have a right to kill as many as the Palestinians as want and to steal all the land.

Is that it??

a practicing Jew and a Palestinian talking. He has the nerve to ask her those questions.

We expect her to represent the perspective of her constituency, not her own personal prejudices.

Of course, if the majority of her constituents are also anti-Semiters or anti-Israel scum, then they may be safely ridiculed and firmly refuted.

Lib-Prog-Dems can be every bit as obtuse and disingenuous in defense of their own as Rumpian scum - in ways both different AND similar.

Democrats have a lot of Jewish in Congress, more than republicans who have 1 or 2.

Yep.

Some understand the existential fight for Eretz Yisrael and support it and denounce filth like Omar.

Others, content to live in the Diaspora and shielded from EuroTrash and MuzzieScum by the Atlantic Ocean, betray and abandon their co-religionists.

Lib-Prog-Dems, foolishly trying to be All Things To All People and lacking the ball$ to take a stand, throw Israel under the bus, every chance they get.

Not all... mind you... but enough to create and sustain the stereotype.

You sure are a hater.

Nope... I don't hate anyone... but I believe that the idiot Palestinians need to be forcibly relocated to the East Bank of the Jordan forevermore.

Hitler inspired?

yes-----it seems ALL muslims are adolf lovers, even the non-arabs and
EVEN including the Iranians who actually despise the arabs

She was calling for removal of all Palestiinians. So much for Judeo/Christian morals.

To hell with the so-called Palestinians... fools, idiots, whiners and losers... time to shove 'em across the Jordan... for keeps...

Have you ever been to Jordan or East Jerusalem or the West Bank? Christian and Muslim Palestinians are quite friendly and hospitable.

Doesn't make any difference... they cannot co-exist with the new Masters of that land... vae victus... time for the Palestinians to face reality and relocate.

The world is tired of listening to Palestinian bull$hit and excuses... and the Israelis aren't going anywhere... one of 'em has to go... it will be the Palestinians.

Might as well get it over with sooner rather than later and spare the world their whining and more pointless bloodshed... leave... and live.

The European Zionists were refugees. Now they have been on the dole for 70 years.

Rubbish. They came. They saw. They conquered. The Jews are now the Masters of the old Romano-Turkic province of 'Palestine', not your Muzzie pals.

Yes, but you seem to forget that is illegal to "Come, Saw, and Conqueror", a crime, immoral and unethical.
The Muslim Arabs are the indigenous natives and had the right to live there in peace.
The illegal European Jewish immigrants are in violation of the law originally, and have only compounded it with much greater violations of law, such as murder and home confiscations.
What you seem to forget is that the Romans and Turks were also criminals for their illegal invasion and conquest.
The Palestinians had earned independence through their assistance to the Allies in WWI, and are now required to have that independence upheld.
The Allies signed the treaties ensuring Palestinian independence.
They can't legally renege now.

The Holy Land has changed hands so many times that "indigenous" has very little meaning.

Rather like having your living room in the middle of a four-lane high-speed highway...

To the Devil with the idiot Palestinians...

Not at all true.

The Canaanites were the first to prosper in the Levant we now call Palestine, and it still is largely inhabited by Canaanite Palestinians.
The Egyptians invaded a few times, but they did nothing to change the population or have much effect.
Same with the Hittites, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrew, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, etc.
The invaders did not stay or change the demographics significantly.

The people who are indigenous natives and did stay, are the Palestinians.
They are the Canaanites, Chaldeans. Akkadians, Phoenicians, Philistines, Amorites, Urites, Nabatians, etc.

The Hebrew were not native, and did not stay.
The Israelis are attempting to implement a myth that was never true.
There likely was no King David, there is no Chosen People or Promised Land.

Rigby you weren’t there, you don’t know. Yes or no?

I do not have to have been there in order to know.
This is not prehistoric, and there are plenty of accounts written at the time that we now can read.
Just ask yourself if when Rome invaded Greece, if the demographics of Athens and Sparta suddenly became all Roman the Greeks are were killed or driven off?
Of course not.
The whole point of invasion is almost always just to add the economic strength and productivity to the empire.
That is always how imperialism works.
And historians can also tell by tracing culture, such as written language.
We know the Amorites were not killed off by the Hebrew invasion because we know the Hebrew did not have a written script and instead use Aramaic.
We know the Hebrew did not rule long because they were beaten by the Babylonians, then the Assyrians, and later by the Romans.

I also know the Hebrew were not the Chosen People and the Land of Canaan was not the Promised Land because that would be immoral.
To place one people over others would be immoral, and to take occupied land and give it to others would be immoral.
And if God is that immoral, I would prefer to believe God then did not exist.

Morality is subjective. I consider Your posts to be immoral. Why would that make me wrong? It would not. God is also based on faith not fact. Pretty convenient.

Human morality is not totally subjective.
Humans are not just social animals by conditioning after birth, but have inherent instincts that make them social.
Its like any primate, such as Meerkats, that survive through collective social instincts, like empathy.
That is why all but a few psychotic feel it is wrong to steal, murder, rape, etc., and that is why most people do not fool a lie detector test.

God is faith based, but the values we have built in would have to reflect the values of God, if we were created by God.
So an anti social God creating humans to be social, would be a contradiction.

So which religion is “moral”? Islam and Christianity blast gays and sex before marriage. So both are immoral then. Are Protestants or Catholics moral? Are Shia or Sunni moral? Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice? Which is more moral. Humans are social but not all humans hence we have introverts and extroverts. Hyenas travel in packs too and steal food and hunt cute little animals. Are they moral?

Is boxing moral? Is football moral? People die participating in those events. Is allowing transgender women to compete vs biological women in the Olympics moral? Pretty sure ancient Greeks would disagree. Yet me questioning this is immortal to many.

Morality is subjective. Next…

All religions tend to not be moral.
That is because religions are not according to our inherent instincts, but instead are attempts by the powerful elite to control and change what we think is moral or not, even when in conflict with our inherent instincts.
If religion was moral, then we would not need it since we already would do as we know is moral.
Religion is to get you to do what is immoral.

They morality of all animals differ.
It depends on evolution.

Transgender competing in sports is immoral in my opinion.

Morality is not subjective within the human species, just confusing.

Now it’s in your opinion but usually you say “everyone knows”. Islam was based on conquest and Muhammad was a warlord. That is indisputable. Morality is 100% subjective. Are you pro life or pro choice?

Muhammed never left the Arabian Peninsula after the Call.. after hiis caravan days.. ... so he wasn't "conquering".

What does abortion rights have to do with this discussion?

How is morality subjective? The ten commandments is pretty clear. Muslims follow the same ones. .. and also the Golden Rule.

Bull$hit...

Muhammed... P(eanut butter and jelly) B(e) U(pon) Him... was a Jim Jones type of hallucinatory televangelist in the pre-television age.

He got lucky and suckered a great many people into following him after inventing a collection of scripture largely plagiarized from Judaism and Christianity...

His is the last large-scale Warrior Religion remaining on the face of the planet... and therefore an ongoing threat to the peace of the region and the world...

He was a bloodthirsty self-excusing conqueror who shifted the blame to God for all of the blood he shed or that would later be shed in the name of Islam...

Worse yet... he promised his simple-minded followers that anyone who died in defense of Islam or Muslims got a free ticket to Paradise...

Muhammed wasn't a conqueror? You apparently haven't read much of his conquest of the Arabian peninsula or his slaughter of Jews and Christians when convenient.

You may be an idiot.

Everybody in the OT also had visions.

Abraham was also a warlord ..

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with ...

Genesis 21:22–34: Abraham makes seven-fold covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba

Abraham seals a contract with King Abimelech for a well and seals it with a seven-fold oath in the form of seven ewes.

hallel.info

Abraham is not just a wealthy nomad, Abraham was a warlord after he conquered the five kings that had conquered Sodom and the five cities of the plain. Abimelech also knew that Elohim, who called Abraham His prophet, had destroyed those cities Himself with fire and brimstone. Abimelech asks Abraham to promise not to “deal falsely” with him.

Fortunately for the world, Jesus of Nazareth set aside the worst elements of the Old Testament and served-up a new, peaceful and loving vision for Mankind.

Muhammed (a religious Johnny-come-lately who was ridiculed by Jews and Christians alike for his weird plagiarized pseudo-theology) was just a throw-back.

Poor Jesus----He was, clearly, a HILLEL man. He was very moderate----just like Hillel whom
he quoted incessantly-------unfortunately he was over-ruled by Constantine and his Minions---especially that maniac JUSTIN who galvanized genocides

Oh, there is no dispute over whether Christianity has been hijacked from time to time by secular rulers who connived to put a Divine spin on their agendas.

But, unlike Islam, the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth always provide a Self-Correcting Mechanism that Islam lacks and which it will never acquire.

Jesus was never a warlord. Muhammad was. Muhammad was also illiterate and insane.

Abraham was also a warlord. He was a Bedouin chieftain.

Genesis 14 portrays Abraham as the commander of his own company of troops, augmented by those of his Amorite allies.

Doesn't matter.

Most modern folk write-off much of the Old Testament as a tribal narrative replete with various morality plays, rather than a historically accurate document.

Adam... Noah... Abraham... and all of that earliest gaggle of characters... it's unlikely that some or all of them even existed, never mind what they were reputed to have done.

Jesus of Nazareth, on the other hand, is a historical figure reasonably-well documented, and did, indeed, exist.

Ditto for Muhammed... much to the eventual pain and agony and fear of much of the world.

Jesus of Nazareth was quite probably divinely inspired as a Bringer of Peace and Love.

Muhammed was quite probably hallucinating and suckered a gaggle of early followers and was satanically inspired as a Bringer of War and Slaughter.

Oh... you can have "peace" with Islam... so long as you convert or pay The Tax... but oppose them, or convert to another faith, and you bring a Death Sentence upon yourself.

To this very day Muslims treat non-Muslims as Second Class Citizens within its domains...

No to mention the misogyny...

Or its solution for homosexuality...

Or its punishment for marital infidelity...

Or its solution for discouraging theft...

Primitive Neanderthal phukks...

In the final analysis, Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization and Western Democracy, and it needs to stay within its own old domains and not try infecting others.

You're not fooling anyone...

We've got your number...

Checkmate

Wrong.
The penalties for theft, like cutting off a hand, comes from Judaism, not Mohammad.

9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

{...
Matthew 5:30
If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matthew 18:8
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

2 Samuel 4:12
Then David commanded the young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and hung them up beside the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner in Hebron.

Deuteronomy 25:12
then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Mark 9:43
If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,

Proverbs 26:6
He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence
Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.

1 Samuel 5:4
But when they arose early the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen on his face to the ground before the ark of the Lord. And the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off on the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.

Judges 1:6
But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.

Judges 1:7
Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Cutting Off Hands And Feet
...}

But Mohammad allows for so many ways to avoid it, that it likely never happened.
For example, all the thief has to do is pay compensation for what was stolen.

{...
Below are some of the restriction on the punishment of cutting off the hand of a thief:

• This penalty can only be prescribed by a judge. Therefore, either the owner of the property or other eyewitnesses must apply to the authorities for the judgment first.
• To be able to mention this penalty, the stolen property must be somewhere preserved. If the stolen property was not in a preserved area, the crime is not qualified as theft and the punishment is not implemented.
• Nobody’s hand can be cut off if a person or his/her family for whom he/she is responsible to take care of was starving and therefore stole food. In other words, if their life was in danger, the hand amputation punishment is not implemented.
• None of God’s verses address the children. That clearly means: children are not liable towards God. Their parents or guardians are responsible to teach them what is good or bad, what is lawful or forbidden, until they reach puberty. Then, when they reach the puberty, they become responsible for complying with God’s commands and prohibitions. So, a child who has not reached the puberty cannot be judged by the criminal law for his misdeeds, let alone having his/her hand cut off.
• If the crime was committed in threat of life or under any other type of coercion, the punishment is not implemented.
• If there are no witnesses and the thief himself/herself admits the crime and repents before being caught, the penalty is not implemented.

Still, some ignorant people rush to judge the laws of Islamic Shari’ah, their penalties and sentences as harsh. They grieve for the hand that is cut, but forget, or want to forget, the crime that this hand committed, and the permanent negative effect on the public peace and the evil that the crime entails. They take pity on the criminal and not on the victim.

It should be noted that the Prophet was not a violent or cruel man. Our Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a righteous man who strove intensely for justice, and everything he did was in accordance with the commandments of Allah. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a man of great qualities. People, even who hated him, saw in him exceptional qualities. He was, as the Qur’an eloquently states, a man of exalted character:

“You are of a great nature and morals.” (al-Qalam 68: 4)

In all of the cases where hand amputation punishment is not implemented, the rights of the victim must also be protected. Then, the thief has to pay for a compensation fee and another fee as punishment. This is called “muqabalah bi’l mithl = equivalent retaliation”. Please see the following link about this:

http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/on-what-circumstances-the-hand-of-a-thief-should-be-cut-off.html
...}

Were the hands of thieves cut off at the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? - Islam and the Quran

The verses on the punishment of theft are as follows: .وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ “Cut off...

www.islamandquran.org

1. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in Israel for the crime of theft?

2. when was the last time that there was an official hand-chopping in nearby Saudi Arabia for the crime of theft?

------

Your Honor... the Prosecution rests.

Amputation is extremely rare in Arabia. Its the punished for three convictions for grand larceny.

It's not a matter of how RARE it is... the point is that it happens AT ALL... on an OFFICIAL basis... phukking Neanderthals...

We also have capital puishment in the US.. Beheading is instantaneous. They don't have a lot of prisons.. or crime. The Saudi courts are more pro victim than the US

the courts in the shariah shit hole system are PRO ISLAM. Saudi arabia is not much of an \
issue since everyone is a muslim----but in those countries with a non muslim minority--a MUSLIM can get away with anything. Remember the person DANIEL PEARL whom the brave ass lickers
of muhummad murdered by slitting his throat? The murdering dogs were put on trial in a
SPERCIAL non muslim court----WHY? --because in an islamic court, Killing a jew is legal.
The pakistani government tried to avoid embarassment------but---lately the murdering dogs
have been exonerated as per islamic law. For further enlightenment read the koran

They have always sold wine and spirits in Jordan. Haven't you been there?

no I have never been to Jordan-----your inquiry seems silly to me. I have never been
to saudi arabia either---or pakistan, or India I am not a world TRAVELER_----
I have very confidential information from people from just about all over the world
right here in the USA. From your posts I have a strong impression that you imagine
that sipping tea in the parlor as a guest is ENLIGHTENING as to culture and opinions and
FACT

I remember one trip to Jordan in April..It was cold and raining .. and I had cramps. I bought a bottle of red wine on the street.

did it help?-------good thing there are no jews there----someone would use that
episode as an excuse for a murder, rape, pillage exercise in the shariah shit hole in which
hubby was born. (for those who do not know----saudi arabians have a rep. for IMBIBING
but it is "illegal"

 

[rylah]

But... but... but... it was BETTER than the Inquisition...

sheikhbar ummmmmkay?

UAE Writer Criticizes Expulsion of Jews From Arab Countries: ‘We Failed to Learn the Lesson of History’

"This hatred will therefore continue to exist, so long as our heritage [text]books continue to incite hatred against the Jews."

jewishjournal.com