The Holy Quran

[scifes]

I do believe there are crimes that deserve death, I just don't believe that the judicial system is infallible and you cannot appeal the death penalty.

if it contains humans in its chain of processes, then it is not infallable. that is agreed upon.
however, i'm sure many would disagree that such possible fallacies should prevent society from reaping the useful fruits of the death penalty.

I fail to see what the damage might be to a society that allows same sex adults to love each other.

you absolutely have the right to, which is why you're not truly expected to understand the structure from where you are, perhaps if you live or study the islamic lifestyle long enough, and get a feeling for how the whole lifestyle flows, then such things may make sense to you.

for example, extremist(and i don't mean that in a bad way) muslims may consider all westren women bitches and whores, because they have sex before marriage.
it is considered a failure, on the other hand, for a teen not to get laid by the time he finishes high school in western culture.

you can see the big variation of views regarding social matters because of vastly different cultures.

now the big question, which culture is "right"? is it right to be sexually open and free, or to give your sexual activity special meaning and practice it in "civil" constraints?
what constraints are considered logical and civil, which are considered extremely depriving, and which are considered animalistic and almost savage?
what's the reference point?
if we keep religion out of this, the answer would be, they're all correct in their matching environments.
limiting your sexual activity in a highly segregated society, where sexuality is considered a cherished experience not to be used carelessly with anyone anywhere, and where much is expected from individuals in matters of conservativeness, then it is matching to go by those standards and blend in the system.
but if the opposite were to be applied, in which a cog from one system is tried in the other, like expecting one who has never fornicated all his life to accept a wife who has had past relationships, or the opposite, of punishing one for pursuing relationships outside the border of marriage and holding him to the same standards to those who find full dedication in marriage, wouldn't work and is illogical.

that extends to segregation and the hijab and polygamy and so on.
what is evil in one context is acceptable and required in another.
hope you got it.

 

[scifes]

The fundamental principle upon which civilization depends is: You may not ever kill another human being, except in self-defense against an imminent threat of violence. The reason is that if humans are not proscribed from killing each other, we would each have to dissipate a significant amount of our time, energy and other resources to simply protecting ourselves from each other, so there would not be enough resources remaining to produce the surplus that is the reason for building a civilization in the first place.

i'm not talking about allowing people to kill each other, but punishment by death after trial, how are we wasting time and resources defending ourselves then? when those who threaten our lives are threatening their lives as well?

Once a criminal has been captured and imprisoned, regardless of what he did, he is no longer a threat; there is no reason to kill him and every reason not to,

how about justice? is that not a good enough reason? if somebody killed a close one to me then it is only natural and logical for me to expect the same to happen to him, if one destroyed the lives of tens if not hundreds of people through drugs and turned their lives to living hell, doesn't he deserve retribution? regardless of whether that will bring the dead back or fix the addicts, but doesn't the human sense of justice and equality yearn for "an eye for an eye"?

since eyewitness testimony is never 100% reliable and he may be found to be innocent at a later date.

what if that date is after he dies in prison?
then by your logic we shouldn't even put them in prison, eh?

The only reason the drug industry causes so much harm to society is that it is illegal. Whenever the shit-for-brains government (especially when capitulating to the demands of the shit-for-brains religious fundamentalists) transfers a popular commodity to the black market, criminals will take over the business and solve their disputes with violence rather than lawyers.

women are a popular commodity, so are little girls and boys, i'm sure guns are a popular commodity as well, i wonder if you think the shit for brains should stop making those legal too.
so what should the legal system ban, if not what people want? it should ban what they don't want? then what's the need for it? have no legal system, is that what you're asking for? give people what they want, legalize everything? turn the country into disney land?

Americans learned that in the 1910s and 20s when they attempted to outlaw alcohol and cities like Chicago became war zones. Unfortunately my people have short memories and now they're attempting to outlaw other drugs, which has turned the entire nation of Mexico into a war zone

.
and so, when criminals fight for their illegal endeavors, we should legalize their business to avoid violence? some logic.
and what about when africa becomes a war zone because the UN is trying to stop slavery, should we legalize slavery too, eh?

Nations that have decriminalized drugs have no major problems with the drug industry. My grandfather was a pharmacist who sold heroin and cocaine in his shop, and none of his customers became either addicts or criminals.

that's easy to believe.

The people who need "rehabilitating" are the morons in government who think they have the right to tell people what they can and can't do in the privacy of their home,

what childish logic, "down with the adults, we want to do what we like! we know what's good for us!" and who's "us" exactly? a group of specialists? no just anybody knows what's best for him, so much for society then..

Statistics consistently show that the severity of punishment has almost no influence at all on people's choice to commit crimes. Only the certainty of punishment can do that,

very interesting, please give me a link.

 

[scifes]

Those 'sacrificeable elements' being in this case...gay people.



....ربما كان السكوت جواباً ...rubbama kana as-sukootu jawaaban.

It amazes me sometimes how near religious reactionaries like scifes are to drawing lots for a good stoning.

well well, look who popped his head up, you stoned yet or about to?

 

[spidergoat]

The problem is that the Islamic ideal is just an ideal, it never works in reality, sexuality is such that it transcends any society's attempts to constrain it. The proof is that Islam must prescribe such harsh penalties in order to maintain it's domination. It is exactly this patriarchal domination that makes harsh sexual rules necessary. Islam teaches that one cannot respect women as people, they are just rewards for good behavior, they cannot have an independent life from men. Islam makes them sexual objects. Men aren't even expected to restrain themselves around exposed female flesh or even be alone with one. I am not one of those people who thinks every culture is equally fair or valid. Sexual liberation is just another dimension of human freedom, like political liberation, artistic liberation, and religious liberation. The full flowering of human potential is not possible under Islam. The Quran is about limiting human behavior, it's about conformity and repression. While I think certain rules are necessary in society, too many rules limit creativity. The purpose of life is not to be relatively perfect like a prophet and so attain paradise. We are tasked with breaking out of the limits of society and becoming true individuals, people that have never before existed. This is our future.

 

[GeoffP]

i'm not talking about allowing people to kill each other, but punishment by death after trial, how are we wasting time and resources defending ourselves then? when those who threaten our lives are threatening their lives as well?

I thought you said that social enemies also had to be punished for the good of their society. You know, like gay people, as you were arguing last page.

and so, when criminals fight for their illegal endeavors, we should legalize their business to avoid violence? some logic.
and what about when africa becomes a war zone because the UN is trying to stop slavery, should we legalize slavery too, eh?

It's a question of reasonability, scifes. Fraggle doesn't agree with death penalty, but he's not supporting anarchy. Your propensity to flee for the most extreme reduction possible is not going to help here.

what childish logic, "down with the adults, we want to do what we like! we know what's good for us!" and who's "us" exactly? a group of specialists? no just anybody knows what's best for him, so much for society then..

Sorry: who are the children here? And who the adults? Why do you think conservatism is the adult in this scenario? Because a legal system leaning on medieval religious discrimination is somehow more mature than reasoned consideration? It's precisely those children that need to be shut up.

well well, look who popped his head up

And look who just ducked his head down! Why is it that religious reactionaries are also the first ones to run for cover when their betters confront them?

 

[greenboy]

The majority of muslim countries are totalitarian societies. Right now we are protesting because in Iran Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani, In Iran he got a death sentence just because he is a Christian Pastor and they want for him to resign the Christian Faith.

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2010/October/Execution-of-Iranian-Pastor-Temporarily-Delayed/

The Quran maybe is holy. But the Muslims are a Political party not a religion.
FREE Nadrakhani! he is a young guy father of two....

 

[spidergoat]

You are right, but you could also argue that the Vatican was for centuries a political force. Theism itself is totalitarian in nature.

 

[Hesperado]

The Koran spends a lot of its space condemning non-Muslims

According to Bill Warner's assessment (from a careful study of the Koran), 61% of the Koran is about non-Muslims, and the vast majority of those are expressing condemnation and hatred (see examples below). (The minuscule portion of neutral or seemingly benign verses about the "People of the Book" (Jews and Christians) must be seen in the context of their dhimmitude, and their payment of jizya extortion tax by which they should "feel humiliated".)

Another interesting stat from Warner: of the 174 verses about Hell in the Koran, 94% of them stipulate that those burning in Hell (or who will burn in Hell when they die) are being punished for not believing that Mohammed is the final Prophet of God.

A short incomplete list of hate verses in the Koran:

40:10. "Surely those who disbelieve [i.e., non-Muslims] shall be cried out to: Certainly Allah's hatred (of you) when you were called upon to the faith and you rejected, is much greater than your hatred of yourselves."

60:4. "There is a goodly pattern for you in Abraham and those with him, when they told their folk: Lo! we are guiltless of you and all that ye worship beside Allah. We have done with you. And there hath arisen between us and you hostility and hate for ever until ye believe in Allah only - save that which Abraham promised his father (when he said): I will ask forgiveness for thee, though I own nothing for thee from Allah - Our Lord! In Thee we put our trust, and unto Thee we turn repentant, and unto Thee is the journeying."

35:39. "It is He who appointed you viceroys in the earth. So whosoever disbelieves, his unbelief shall be charged against him; their unbelief increases the disbelievers only in hate in God's sight; their unbelief increases the disbelievers only in loss."

5:14. "And with those who say: "Lo! we are Christians," We made a covenant, but they forgot a part of that whereof they were admonished. Therefore We have stirred up enmity and hatred among them till the Day of Resurrection, when Allah will inform them of their handiwork."

5:64. "The Jews say: Allah's hand is fettered. Their hands are fettered and they are accursed for saying so. Nay, but both His hands are spread out wide in bounty. He bestoweth as He will. That which hath been revealed unto thee from thy Lord is certain to increase the contumacy and disbelief of many of them, and We have cast among them enmity and hatred till the Day of Resurrection. As often as they light a fire for war, Allah extinguisheth it. Their effort is for corruption in the land, and Allah loveth not corrupters."

98:6. “Lo! those who disbelieve, among the People of the Scripture and the idolaters, will abide in fire of hell. They are the worst of created beings.”

Source for the first couple of paragraphs: Bill Warner's site at politicalislam.com (I can't post links here yet, as I'm new).

 

[spidergoat]

I fail to see how any religion can be concerned with mankind's place in the world and not be concerned about politics. Politics are just an aspect of human behavior.

 

[NMSquirrel]

I fail to see how any religion can be concerned with mankind's place in the world and not be concerned about politics. Politics are just an aspect of human behavior.

religion is supposed to be about being good, Politics are about looking good..

 

[Big Chiller]

I fail to see how any religion can be concerned with mankind's place in the world and not be concerned about politics. Politics are just an aspect of human behavior.

Religion and politics are two separate and different concepts.

 

[iceaura]

Religion and politics are two separate and different concepts.

Tell that to the fundies of Abraham. They don't seem to have read the memo.

 

[GeoffP]

This is true; and where true, needs to be vigorously opposed.

 

[Bells]

According to Bill Warner's assessment (from a careful study of the Koran), 61% of the Koran is about non-Muslims, and the vast majority of those are expressing condemnation and hatred (see examples below). (The minuscule portion of neutral or seemingly benign verses about the "People of the Book" (Jews and Christians) must be seen in the context of their dhimmitude, and their payment of jizya extortion tax by which they should "feel humiliated".)

Another interesting stat from Warner: of the 174 verses about Hell in the Koran, 94% of them stipulate that those burning in Hell (or who will burn in Hell when they die) are being punished for not believing that Mohammed is the final Prophet of God.

A short incomplete list of hate verses in the Koran:

40:10. "Surely those who disbelieve [i.e., non-Muslims] shall be cried out to: Certainly Allah's hatred (of you) when you were called upon to the faith and you rejected, is much greater than your hatred of yourselves."

60:4. "There is a goodly pattern for you in Abraham and those with him, when they told their folk: Lo! we are guiltless of you and all that ye worship beside Allah. We have done with you. And there hath arisen between us and you hostility and hate for ever until ye believe in Allah only - save that which Abraham promised his father (when he said): I will ask forgiveness for thee, though I own nothing for thee from Allah - Our Lord! In Thee we put our trust, and unto Thee we turn repentant, and unto Thee is the journeying."

35:39. "It is He who appointed you viceroys in the earth. So whosoever disbelieves, his unbelief shall be charged against him; their unbelief increases the disbelievers only in hate in God's sight; their unbelief increases the disbelievers only in loss."

5:14. "And with those who say: "Lo! we are Christians," We made a covenant, but they forgot a part of that whereof they were admonished. Therefore We have stirred up enmity and hatred among them till the Day of Resurrection, when Allah will inform them of their handiwork."

5:64. "The Jews say: Allah's hand is fettered. Their hands are fettered and they are accursed for saying so. Nay, but both His hands are spread out wide in bounty. He bestoweth as He will. That which hath been revealed unto thee from thy Lord is certain to increase the contumacy and disbelief of many of them, and We have cast among them enmity and hatred till the Day of Resurrection. As often as they light a fire for war, Allah extinguisheth it. Their effort is for corruption in the land, and Allah loveth not corrupters."

98:6. “Lo! those who disbelieve, among the People of the Scripture and the idolaters, will abide in fire of hell. They are the worst of created beings.”

Source for the first couple of paragraphs: Bill Warner's site at politicalislam.com (I can't post links here yet, as I'm new).

You haven't spent much time reading the Old Testament - the book that most Christian religions are based on - have you?

I mean we have the sanctioned killing of the son's of sinners. Killing anyone who worships another God. One of my personal favourites explains what is and is not acceptable when a man sells his daughter as a slave or sex slave. And the sheer amount of apparently God sanctioned children by Joshua alone would have to make him on par with some of the worst mass murderers and those of the likes who led genocides and holocaust in history. And I haven't even touched on Deuteronomy from the Bible. He makes the list you posted look like a children's story... I could go on and on really..

And as for the Torah.. well.. about the same as the OT really.. Obviously...

In short, all religious texts have their fair share of hatred and murders and excuses for such crimes as rape, slavery and murder and justification for their hatred. To then carry on as if it is because 'they be Muslims' is inane really and the work of classic Islamaphobes.. Then again, you have claimed to 'embody' Islamaphobia, so I should not be shocked by your blinkered comments.

 

[Bells]

This is true; and where true, needs to be vigorously opposed.

I think you would find that many issues that plague the political arena (homosexual rights being a prime example) stems from religious beliefs. And yes, supporters of such policies that deny rights to a portion of the population because they are homosexual should be vigorously opposed. Unfortunately people like Bachmann appears to have quite a gathering and support amongst the right, along with her 'homosexuals are barbarians' husband who seems to believe that one can pray away the gay (watch the video and hear the counsellor working at their clinic telling a homosexual that god designed men to be attracted to women's boobs - really worth the facepalm and laugh it received).. The same goes for women's rights in regards to choice.

 

[Hesperado]

You haven't spent much time reading the Old Testament - the book that most Christian religions are based on - have you?

...In short, all religious texts have their fair share of hatred and murders and excuses for such crimes as rape, slavery and murder and justification for their hatred.

Then, given your assessment above, does that mean you condemn Islam equally along with all other religions?

Then again, you have claimed to 'embody' Islamaphobia, so I should not be shocked by your blinkered comments.

I didn't claim to embody Islamophobia; I claimed to embody "Islamophobia" with the sneer quotes denoting sarcastic distance from the term's tendentious purport.

 

[spidergoat]

Religion and politics are two separate and different concepts.

I understand why they are separated in US law, but from a philosophical point of view, there is no difference. Religions often describe guidelines for society, and they inform many people's political views. You are going to vote very differently on, for instance, environmental subjects if you think the Earth is 6,000 years old and will end any day now vs. someone who thinks it's 4 billion years old and going strong.

 

[Bells]

Then, given your assessment above, does that mean you condemn Islam equally along with all other religions?

As an atheist, I think people should follow whatever they want to follow without suspicion or be discriminated against or forced into it or something else.

I also reserve the right to point to all theists and say 'you're a stoopid head' at any time, not because of their particular religion, but because they are theists.

I didn't claim to embody Islamophobia; I claimed to embody "Islamophobia" with the sneer quotes denoting sarcastic distance from the term's tendentious purport.

Mr Hesperado, I have spent some time reading through your blogs since you joined this forum. To say they were enlightening would not be even remotely correct. To say your writings are, ermm, somewhat paranoid and leading to bigotry, then I would say that would be a correct assumption.

You are a raving Islamophobe. There is nothing to be ashamed about in that. But yes, because you are an Islamophobe, you will at many times, be the subject of some scrutiny from myself and my colleagues. You see, I find your obsession with Islam to be amusing. Not as funny as your praising Vincent to high heaven, but still.. amusing. You actually remind me of a former poster, now banned, who viewed Muslims in the same light as you do. She also viewed Hispanics and anyone coloured to be diseased carrying scum intent, along with Muslims, to destroy and take over America. She may be connecting the same dots you have which appears to show you that over 1 billion people are currently silently plotting to take over the West [insert music from shower scene in Psycho here]...

But I like you Hesperado. You amuse the hell out of me because you are so paranoid.

 

[GeoffP]

I think you would find that many issues that plague the political arena (homosexual rights being a prime example) stems from religious beliefs. And yes, supporters of such policies that deny rights to a portion of the population because they are homosexual should be vigorously opposed. Unfortunately people like Bachmann appears to have quite a gathering and support amongst the right, along with her 'homosexuals are barbarians' husband who seems to believe that one can pray away the gay (watch the video and hear the counsellor working at their clinic telling a homosexual that god designed men to be attracted to women's boobs - really worth the facepalm and laugh it received).. The same goes for women's rights in regards to choice.

All agreed, save on the morality of the final proposition, as you well know.

Worse still when opposition to the imposition of questionable morality on an unwilling or unwise populace can be labeled 'bigotry' or 'racism'. A Trojan horse, filled with poison.

 

[Bells]

All agreed, save on the morality of the final proposition, as you well know.

But again though, that is up to the individual to choose for themselves. For example, I do not believe some random individual in the Vatican should have a say or control over my uterus or its contents.

Worse still when opposition to the imposition of questionable morality on an unwilling or unwise populace can be labeled 'bigotry' or 'racism'. A Trojan horse, filled with poison.

The populace will fight back if it goes against the popular belief. For example, the fear of those like Mr Hesperado here, about Islam or anyone who is not white and could thus be Muslim, is based purely on hatred. You read his blogs and you see he makes no excuses for his hatred and mistrust of all Muslims. To him, Muslim and Islam = unacceptable. His solution is to profile (ie anyone with a remotely Arabic or Muslim name should face scrutiny, anyone who is known to be a Muslim, anyone of colour should be tested and what he deems the smaller percentage of whites who could be Muslum should be weeded out) racially and religiously and then deport. Pure and simple.

Now to me that is bigotry and racist. I would expect it is to you as well. Unfortunately he is not alone in such beliefs. There is a plethora of sites like the ones created by and frequented by Mr Hesperado and all push the same thing.

That Muslims are simply unacceptable in Western society and all Muslims cannot be trusted.

But lets look at the basis of that fear. That Muslims will infiltrate the West and destroy it by installing their religious dogma's into Western society. That the chances of that happening is nil is beside the point. You and I both know that there is zero chance that you will be forced to convert to Islam anytime soon. But if you read Mr Hesperado's sites and those he links to and has even been banned from for being too much of a bigot, they do not see it that way. To those of his ilk, every single Muslim poses a danger to society because of the religion they belong to and therefore said Muslims have no place, in that they do not belong to Western society and should either leave voluntarily or be forced or deported.

Now again, to me that is bigotry.