The fact is that there is no set rules under Sharia law, and it is entirely up to different interpretations and definitions, and it is not set in stone.

Link wikipedia here = Sharia Law as interpreted (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#Schools_of_thought).

Link = Sharia law: A brief introduction (http://www.religioustolerance.org/islsharia.htm)

The Sharia law only applies to Muslims, in how they live within their religion.

And Sharia Law calls for the respect of Christianity and for Judaism - the people of the book (the Bible).

:drummer:

Knowing that you support it makes me feel sooo much safer and comfortable! :yahoo:

And Sharia Law calls for the respect of Christianity and for Judaism - the people of the book (the Bible).

:bs:

No surprise this sort of deception would come from you.

"Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority" - Koran 3:151

"They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah. But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks." - Koran 4:89

"I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" - Koran 8:12

"And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!" - Koran 9:30

"O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness." - Koran 9:123

"If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter." - Koran 33:60

"Those who reject Allah follow vanities, while those who believe follow the truth from their lord. Thus does Allah set forth form men their lessons by similtudes. Therefore when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners," - Koran 37:3-4

"The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him." - Bukhari 52:177

The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." - Bukhari 52:256

Allah's Apostle said... 'I have been made victorious with terror' - Bukhari 52:220

Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah - Bukhari 8:387

"Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah." - Ibn Ishaq: 992

The fact is that there is no set rules under Sharia law, and it is entirely up to different interpretations and definitions, and it is not set in stone.

Link wikipedia here = Sharia Law as interpreted (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#Schools_of_thought).

Link = Sharia law: A brief introduction (http://www.religioustolerance.org/islsharia.htm)

The Sharia law only applies to Muslims, in how they live within their religion.

And Sharia Law calls for the respect of Christianity and for Judaism - the people of the book (the Bible).

:drummer:
Are you a Muslim or dirty kaffir like the rest of us infidels?

The fact is that there is no set rules under Sharia law, and it is entirely up to different interpretations and definitions, and it is not set in stone.

Link wikipedia here = Sharia Law as interpreted (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#Schools_of_thought).

Link = Sharia law: A brief introduction (http://www.religioustolerance.org/islsharia.htm)

The Sharia law only applies to Muslims, in how they live within their religion.

And Sharia Law calls for the respect of Christianity and for Judaism - the people of the book (the Bible).

:drummer:
You forgot part, "and anyone else who lives under their rule"

You forgot part, "and anyone else who lives under their rule"

Or anyone they perceive living under their rule.

And Sharia Law calls for the respect of Christianity and for Judaism - the people of the book (the Bible).

:drummer:

Hmmm... let's see about that "respect"


1.) Sharia Law "respectfully" places Jews and Christians (The People of The Book) automatically under second-class dhimmi status;

2.) Sharia Law "respectfully" forbids Muslims from marrying a Jew or Christian;

in which case

3.) Sharia Law "respectfully" calls for the honor killing of a Muslim who marries a Jew or a Christian;

4.) Sharia Law "respectfully" prevents Jews from building new synagogues in a Muslim land and prohibits remodeling or upgrading an existing synagogue;

5.) Sharia Law "respectfully" prevents Christians from building new churches in a Muslim land and prohibits remodeling or upgrading an existing church;

6.) Sharia Law "respectfully" forbids Jews from walking on the same side of a sidewalk as a Muslim;

7.) Sharia Law "respectfully" forbids Christians from publicly proselytizing among a Muslim community;

8.) Sharia Law "respectfully" calls for killing anyone (Jew, Christian, Atheist) for drawing a picture of the Islamic prophet, Muhammad;

9.) Sharia Law "respectfully" calls for the killing anyone (Jew, Christian, Atheist) who burns a copy of the Qur'an;

10.) Sharia Law "respectfully" calls for killing anyone (Jew, Christian, Atheist) for slandering the name of the Islamic prophet, Muhammad;

to be continued...

Wirelessly posted

And Sharia Law calls for the respect of Christianity and for Judaism - the people of the book (the Bible).

:bs:

No surprise this sort of deception would come from you.

"Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority" - Koran 3:151

"They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah. But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks." - Koran 4:89

"I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" - Koran 8:12

"And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!" - Koran 9:30

"O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness." - Koran 9:123

"If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter." - Koran 33:60

"Those who reject Allah follow vanities, while those who believe follow the truth from their lord. Thus does Allah set forth form men their lessons by similtudes. Therefore when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners," - Koran 37:3-4

"The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him." - Bukhari 52:177

The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." - Bukhari 52:256

Allah's Apostle said... 'I have been made victorious with terror' - Bukhari 52:220

Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah - Bukhari 8:387

"Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah." - Ibn Ishaq: 992

Not that I'm taking sides with the crazy guy but remember Luke 19 :smile: Extremists in ANY religion worry me...

Wirelessly posted

Not that I'm taking sides with the crazy guy but remember Luke 19 :smile: Extremists in ANY religion worry me...

UNA, the context of Luke 19:27 is only a "parable" about a king whose subjects hate him and, thus, receive the consequences for refusing to have their King rule over them. It is explained in the earlier verse 14 of that chapter where it states: But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.

That parable was not a direct command nor a suggestion for Jesus' followers to literally go out and kill people at all! The moral of the story (parable) is most likely referring to Judgment Day when all mankind who hated Jesus and refused His Authority to be the Lord and Saviour of their lives will receive the punishment of eternal death. There will be a Judgment Day and when it comes all mankind will either proclaim Christ as their King or be among those who hated Him and refused His Authority to lead their life.

If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. (John 15:18)

But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause. (John 15:25)


As far as the Islamic Surrahs of the Qur'an and Ahadith of Muhammad, those are actual direct commands (not parables) that obligate Muslims to engage in the Jihad against unbelievers. And as far as the rewards for righteous Muslims who engage in Jihad and die as martyrs, here is what they are hoping to receive as their reward for being killed for the cause of Al'lah which includes committing suicide bombings:

Rewards Promised to the Righteous Muslims:



Our Prophet has informed us our Lord's Message that whoever of us is martyred, will go to Paradise.
(Sahih Bukhari: Volume 9, Book 93, Number 621: Narrated Al-Mughira)

"As to the Righteous (they will be) in a position of Security, Among Gardens and Springs; Dressed in fine silk and in rich brocade, they will face each other; So; and We shall join them to fair women with beautiful, big, and lustrous eyes." (Qur'an." 044.051 - 044.054)

"Verily for the Righteous there will be a fulfillment of (the heart's) desires;
Gardens enclosed, and grapevines; And voluptuous women of equal age;"
(Qur'an: 078.031 - 078.033)

"We have created (their Companions) of special creation. Lo! We have created them a (new) creation Surely We have made them to grow into a (new) growth, And made them virgin - pure (and undefiled),
(Qur'an: 056.035 - 056.036)

"For them will be Gardens of Eternity; beneath them rivers will flow; they will be adorned therein with bracelets of gold, and they will wear green garments of fine silk and heavy brocade: They will recline therein on raised thrones. How good the recompense! How beautiful a couch to recline on!" (The Qur'an: 018.031)

"But the sincere (and devoted) Servants of Allah, For them is a Sustenance determined, Fruits (Delights); and they (shall enjoy) honour and dignity, In Gardens of Felicity, Facing each other on Thrones (of Dignity):, Round will be passed to them a Cup from a clear-flowing fountain, Crystal-white, of a taste delicious to those who drink (thereof), free from headiness; nor will they suffer intoxication therefrom., And besides them will be chaste women, restraining their glances, with big eyes (of wonder and beauty). As if they were (delicate) eggs closely guarded. (The Qur'an: 37.040 - 37.049)

Also, reference;

"We have created (their Companions) of special creation. And made them virgin - pure (and undefiled), Beloved (by nature), equal in age,"
(The Qur'an: 056.035 - 056.037 )

"The intercession of a martyr will be accepted for seventy members of his family." (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 14, Number 2516, Narrated Abud Darda')

"Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu'z-Zinad from al-Araj from Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "By He in whose hand my self is! I would like to fight in the way of Allah and be killed, then be brought to life again so I could be killed, and then be brought to life again so I could be killed." Abu Hurayra said three times, "I testify to it by Allah!" (Malik's Muwatta, Book 21, Number 21.14.27)



Research (http://www.Starman3000.com)

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted

Not that I'm taking sides with the crazy guy but remember Luke 19 :smile: Extremists in ANY religion worry me...

UNA, the context of Luke 19:27 is only a "parable" about a king whose subjects hate him and, thus, receive the consequences for refusing to have their King rule over them. It is explained in the earlier verse 14 of that chapter where it states: But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.

That parable was not a direct command nor a suggestion for Jesus' followers to literally go out and kill people at all! The moral of the story (parable) is most likely referring to Judgment Day when all mankind who hated Jesus and refused His Authority to be the Lord and Saviour of their lives will receive the punishment of eternal death. There will be a Judgment Day and when it comes all mankind will either proclaim Christ as their King or be amnong those who hated Him and refused His Authority to lead their life.

As far as the Islamic Surrahs of the Qur'an and Ahadith of Muhammad, those are actual direct commands (not parables) that obligate Muslims to engage in the Jihad against unbelievers. And as far as the rewards for righteous Muslims who engage in Jihad and die as martyrs, here is what they are hoping to receive as their reward for being killed for the cause of Al'lah which includes committing suicide bombings:

Rewards Promised to the Righteous Muslims:



Our Prophet has informed us our Lord's Message that whoever of us is martyred, will go to Paradise.
(Sahih Bukhari: Volume 9, Book 93, Number 621: Narrated Al-Mughira)

"As to the Righteous (they will be) in a position of Security, Among Gardens and Springs; Dressed in fine silk and in rich brocade, they will face each other; So; and We shall join them to fair women with beautiful, big, and lustrous eyes." (Qur'an." 044.051 - 044.054)

"Verily for the Righteous there will be a fulfillment of (the heart's) desires;
Gardens enclosed, and grapevines; And voluptuous women of equal age;"
(Qur'an: 078.031 - 078.033)

"We have created (their Companions) of special creation. Lo! We have created them a (new) creation Surely We have made them to grow into a (new) growth, And made them virgin - pure (and undefiled),
(Qur'an: 056.035 - 056.036)

"For them will be Gardens of Eternity; beneath them rivers will flow; they will be adorned therein with bracelets of gold, and they will wear green garments of fine silk and heavy brocade: They will recline therein on raised thrones. How good the recompense! How beautiful a couch to recline on!" (The Qur'an: 018.031)

"But the sincere (and devoted) Servants of Allah, For them is a Sustenance determined, Fruits (Delights); and they (shall enjoy) honour and dignity, In Gardens of Felicity, Facing each other on Thrones (of Dignity):, Round will be passed to them a Cup from a clear-flowing fountain, Crystal-white, of a taste delicious to those who drink (thereof), free from headiness; nor will they suffer intoxication therefrom., And besides them will be chaste women, restraining their glances, with big eyes (of wonder and beauty). As if they were (delicate) eggs closely guarded. (The Qur'an: 37.040 - 37.049)

Also, reference;

"We have created (their Companions) of special creation. And made them virgin - pure (and undefiled), Beloved (by nature), equal in age,"
(The Qur'an: 056.035 - 056.037 )

"The intercession of a martyr will be accepted for seventy members of his family." (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 14, Number 2516, Narrated Abud Darda')

"Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu'z-Zinad from al-Araj from Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "By He in whose hand my self is! I would like to fight in the way of Allah and be killed, then be brought to life again so I could be killed, and then be brought to life again so I could be killed." Abu Hurayra said three times, "I testify to it by Allah!" (Malik's Muwatta, Book 21, Number 21.14.27)



Research (http://www.Starman3000.com)

So the Bible can be taken literally OR interpreted, depending on what part you're reading? Aside from the obvious issues this presents; did you ever stop to think the Koran might have similar rules?

And BTW, another forklift here had a different interpretation. Who should I believe? :lol:

Wirelessly posted

So the Bible can be taken literally OR interpreted, depending on what part you're reading? Aside from the obvious issues this presents; did you ever stop to think the Koran might have similar rules?

It depends on the context of what one is reading from the Bible whereby you decide if it is a literal or figurative-type interpretation. For example, when Jesus proclaims that He is the "Bread of Life" (John 6:35, 38) does that mean Jesus is literally a "loaf of bread"?

Or, how about when Jesus proclaims that He is the Door through which one passes (John 10:9) does that mean Jesus is a literal "door" on hinges?

There needs to be some discernment in reading and understanding the Word of God but then again that is a spiritual discernment that God gives to those who seek His Wisdom and guidance for wanting to know His Truth.


1Cor:2:14: But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.


BTW: It is obvious that Muslims who engage in terror strikes and plots to defeat Western culture are literally taking the Qur'an and Ahadith seriously. That is the ideology that is trying to rule the world at this present time in the world's history.

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted

So the Bible can be taken literally OR interpreted, depending on what part you're reading? Aside from the obvious issues this presents; did you ever stop to think the Koran might have similar rules?

It depends on the context of what one is reading from the Bible whereby you decide if it is a literal or figurative-type interpretation. For example, when Jesus proclaims that He is the "Bread of Life" (John 6:35, 38) does that mean Jesus is literally a "loaf of bread"?

Or, how about when Jesus proclaims that He is the Door through which one passes (John 10:9) does that mean Jesus is a literal "door" on hinges?

There needs to be some discernment in reading and understanding the Word of God but then again that is a spiritual discernment that God gives to those who seek His Wisdom and guidance for wanting to know His Truth.


1Cor:2:14: But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.


BTW: It is obvious that Muslims who engage in terror strikes and plots to defeat Western culture are literally taking the Qur'an and Ahadith seriously. That is the ideology that is trying to rule the world at this present time in the world's history.

Either He's bread or he's promoting cannibalism :lol:

I know the writers of the Bible didn't mean He was a door, but the verse tends to stand alone for many extremist Christians.

Not that I'm taking sides with the crazy guy but remember Luke 19 :smile: Extremists in ANY religion worry me...

Even if 19:27 were taken literally, you don't have verse after verse of Jesus charging His followers to wage war against non-believers. Jesus always spoke in spiritual terms when it came to dying. Jesus constantly preached to be peaceful, and love your enemies, and pray for those that hated you. The real war is with God and evil.

I've always said that Christianity has an ugly past. It was abused to not spread the Gospel, but to force it on others. Islam is doing this now. It was wrong then and it's wrong now. Christians preach a message of peace and forgiveness for ALL today. It is a religion of love and compassion. This can't be said for Islam. What will Islam look like 200 years from now? Who knows.

Wirelessly posted

Either He's bread or he's promoting cannibalism :lol:


:killingme Well, now you get the idea! :buddies:


I know the writers of the Bible didn't mean He was a door, but the verse tends to stand alone for many extremist Christians.

Here again is where that "spiritual discernment" needs to be the guide for a Christian's behaviour and response to the words of the Holy Bible. Verses taken out of context can obviously change the whole meaning of the intended message and that is why there are groups that claim to be Christian and yet are misguided because of false teachings and misinterpretations of Scripture.

This is in contrast to Islam where the literal context of the Surrahs and Ahadith give obviously direct commands for how Muslims are to go bringing this world under Islamic governance. The fundamental message of Islam is to be doing exactly what the likes of al Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Palestinian Authority, Hezbullah, Taliban etc. are all geared up for and that is why we are now engaged in an ongoing battle with an ideology that has come against all Western/secular culture. This is not going away soon and will get worse as time goes on.

Even if 19:27 were taken literally, you don't have verse after verse of Jesus charging His followers to wage war against non-believers. Jesus always spoke in spiritual terms when it came to dying. Jesus constantly preached to be peaceful, and love your enemies, and pray for those that hated you. The real war is with God and evil.As I mentioned recently, [moderate] Muslims proclaim the same thing about a topic such as jihad; the "battle" to be waged is within oneself, not outwardly against others. And they consider themselves devout and faithful to Islam's teachings.

Wirelessly posted

Not that I'm taking sides with the crazy guy but remember Luke 19 :smile: Extremists in ANY religion worry me...

Even if 19:27 were taken literally, you don't have verse after verse of Jesus charging His followers to wage war against non-believers. Jesus always spoke in spiritual terms when it came to dying. Jesus constantly preached to be peaceful, and love your enemies, and pray for those that hated you. The real war is with God and evil.

I've always said that Christianity has an ugly past. It was abused to not spread the Gospel, but to force it on others. Islam is doing this now. It was wrong then and it's wrong now. Christians preach a message of peace and forgiveness for ALL today. It is a religion of love and compassion. This can't be said for Islam. What will Islam look like 200 years from now? Who knows.

Sadly however, there are still many Christians that use verses like this to justify violence.

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted

Either He's bread or he's promoting cannibalism :lol:


:killingme Well, now you get the idea! :buddies:


I know the writers of the Bible didn't mean He was a door, but the verse tends to stand alone for many extremist Christians.

Here again is where that "spiritual discernment" needs to be the guide for a Christian's behaviour and response to the words of the Holy Bible. Verses taken out of context can obviously change the whole meaning of the intended message and that is why there are groups that claim to be Christian and yet are misguided because of false teachings and misinterpretations of Scripture.

This is in contrast to Islam where the literal context of the Surrahs and Ahadith give obviously direct commands for how Muslims are to go bringing this world under Islamic governance. The fundamental message of Islam is to be doing exactly what the likes of al Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Palestinian Authority, Hezbullah, Taliban etc. are all geared up for and that is why we are now engaged in an ongoing battle with an ideology that has come against all Western/secular culture. This is not going away soon and will get worse as time goes on.

Do you see however, that it is not quite as black and white as you portray?

Wirelessly posted

Do you see however, that it is not quite as black and white as you portray?

It is for those Islamic groups that follow the tenets of the Qur'an and teachings of Muhammad. There is a House of Islam and a House of War and Muslims are to be at war with those who do not belong to the House of Islam.

That's why I mentioned that the Islamic groups will not give up and their "Jihad" is going to lead this country into the next all-out world conflict.
Since they are following Muhammad's orders to conquer the world for Al'lah, the fundamental Muslim groups cannot achieve the "greater Jihad" (peace within themselves) until they complete the lesser Jihad (the struggle to make Islam the only religion and way of life for all people in this world).

It's still "Jihad" that fundamental Muslims are obligated to be involved in while the moderate/peaceful Muslims who would rather be "Westernized" are viewed as cowards and apostates.

Research (http://www.Starman3000.com)

The fact is that there is no set rules under Sharia law, and it is entirely up to different interpretations and definitions, and it is not set in stone.

Link wikipedia here = Sharia Law as interpreted (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#Schools_of_thought).

Link = Sharia law: A brief introduction (http://www.religioustolerance.org/islsharia.htm)

The Sharia law only applies to Muslims, in how they live within their religion.

And Sharia Law calls for the respect of Christianity and for Judaism - the people of the book (the Bible).

Islam is a friendly religion - it is the religion of peace.

The Sharia Law gives the Muslims a binding self-discipline which makes the Islamic faith into a very powerful and effective religion of substance.

Others could learn better from the Islamic integrity.

:patriot:

Islam is a friendly religion - it is the religion of peace.

The Sharia Law gives the Muslims a binding self-discipline which makes the Islamic faith into a very powerful and effective religion of substance.

Others could learn better from the Islamic integrity.

:patriot:

So tell us, VoteJP, do you therefore agree with the spokesmen from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) that Sharia Law should replace the U.S. Constitution?

The fact is that there is no set rules under Sharia law, and it is entirely up to different interpretations and definitions, and it is not set in stone.

Eric Holder and Obama must be Muslims because that seems to be how they view our legal system

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted

Do you see however, that it is not quite as black and white as you portray?

It is for those Islamic groups that follow the tenets of the Qur'an and teachings of Muhammad. There is a House of Islam and a House of War and Muslims are to be at war with those who do not belong to the House of Islam.

That's why I mentioned that the Islamic groups will not give up and their "Jihad" is going to lead this country into the next all-out world conflict.
Since they are following Muhammad's orders to conquer the world for Al'lah, the fundamental Muslim groups cannot achieve the "greater Jihad" (peace within themselves) until they complete the lesser Jihad (the struggle to make Islam the only religion and way of life for all people in this world).

It's still "Jihad" that fundamental Muslims are obligated to be involved in while the moderate/peaceful Muslims who would rather be "Westernized" are viewed as cowards and apostates.

Research (http://www.Starman3000.com)

Not. All. Of. Them. Believe. That.

Just like not all Christians are literalists, neither are Muslims.

Wirelessly posted

Islam is a friendly religion - it is the religion of peace.

The Sharia Law gives the Muslims a binding self-discipline which makes the Islamic faith into a very powerful and effective religion of substance.

Others could learn better from the Islamic integrity.

:patriot:

So tell us, VoteJP, do you therefore agree with the spokesmen from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) that Sharia Law should replace the U.S. Constitution?

Do you therefore agree with Anne Coulter that "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity..."? She's a Christian, does she speak for all Christians?

So tell us, VoteJP, do you therefore agree with the spokesmen from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) that Sharia Law should replace the U.S. Constitution?


My understanding is that all he really said was that Sharia Law is not a threat to the United States, and he went on to say how the USA could use some religious guidance including from the Sharia Law.

AS I understand the not-for-public sermon was that he said the USA was in serious religious turmoil as being religiously misguided and he said to make the USA better then it needs an influx of Christian and Jewish and Islamic guidance to guide the US government and the US Constitution.

In that regard he is fairly correct, so I do agree with him in that the USA needs improved moral guidance.

:coffee:

My understanding is that all he really said was that Sharia Law is not a threat to the United States, and he went on to say how the USA could use some religious guidance including from the Sharia Law.

AS I understand the not-for-public sermon was that he said the USA was in serious religious turmoil as being religiously misguided and he said to make the USA better then it needs an influx of Christian and Jewish and Islamic guidance to guide the US government and the US Constitution.

In that regard he is fairly correct, so I do agree with him in that the USA needs improved moral guidance.

:coffee:

Here's the plan, according to CAIR spokesmen:



CAIR Board Member Imam Siraj Wahaj, an un-indicted co-conspirator in the first World Trade Center bombing, has called for replacing the American government with an Islamic caliphate, and warned that America will crumble unless it accepts Islam. *Anti-CAIR* Defending America from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (http://www.anti-cair-net.org/)
---------------------------------------
Omar Ahmad, Co-founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)
5/16/2004

"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."
FrontPage Magazine - Hamas and Hizzoner (http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=6473)

Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) Spokesperson
AP - 6/11/2004

"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like
the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in
the future. ...But I'm not going to do anything violent to promote that. I'm going to do it through education."

Islam is a friendly religion - it is the religion of peace.

The Sharia Law gives the Muslims a binding self-discipline which makes the Islamic faith into a very powerful and effective religion of substance.

Others could learn better from the Islamic integrity.

:patriot:

I figured you'd support Sharia Law and the Muslims if only for the way they treat women..

Your insanity is beyond belief, it truly is.

Better side of Sharia law

Quit trying to dress up a turd JPC. :bonk:

That's like saying the "better side of Ted Bundy".

Wirelessly posted



Do you therefore agree with Anne Coulter that "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity..."? She's a Christian, does she speak for all Christians?

Take away the Christian part, and yes..

How about we just convert them to Humanity?

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



Do you therefore agree with Anne Coulter that "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity..."? She's a Christian, does she speak for all Christians?

Take away the Christian part, and yes..

How about we just convert them to Humanity?

If you 'take away the Christian part'? Then turn it around and 'take away the Muslim part'; use the word humanity instead. The extremists in either group are nuts and so not speak for the whole.

Wirelessly posted



The extremists in either group are nuts and so not speak for the whole.

hence the reason behind, "Take out the Christian part..."

And as far as Muslims go, you're ok with the way Mainstream (not extremist) Muslims treat, and define, women? Even in Progressive Muslim countries women are treated more like property than people. Not allowed to drive, can't shop in the same stores, can't divorce.. can't show their faces.. not supposed to be educated, can't work.. etc.. etc.. etc..

Whenever entire parts of the globe or entire countries start following extreme views, I'd say they are no longer the "extremists" but more the norm.

The fact is that there is no set rules under Sharia law, and it is entirely up to different interpretations and definitions, and it is not set in stone.

Link wikipedia here = Sharia Law as interpreted (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#Schools_of_thought).

Link = Sharia law: A brief introduction (http://www.religioustolerance.org/islsharia.htm)

The Sharia law only applies to Muslims, in how they live within their religion.

And Sharia Law calls for the respect of Christianity and for Judaism - the people of the book (the Bible).

:drummer:



You should make this the centerpiece of your campaign. If you do, there is no doubt you will win handily.

Here's the plan, according to CAIR spokesmen:

You present that as if you are the spokesperson for CAIR when you take small clippings out of old and irrelevant contexts.

Link here for CAIR = > Home < Council on American-Islamic Relations (http://www.cair.com/)

What I said in post #24 on page 3 (http://forums.somd.com/religion/229115-better-side-sharia-law-3.html#post4606228) of this thread is the correct interpretation, as is my posting #1 page 1 (http://forums.somd.com/religion/229115-better-side-sharia-law.html#post4605575).

:coffee:

Quit trying to dress up a turd JPC. :bonk:

That's like saying the "better side of Ted Bundy".

Hey a turd trying to dress up a turd lol

Wirelessly posted



The extremists in either group are nuts and so not speak for the whole.

hence the reason behind, "Take out the Christian part..."

And as far as Muslims go, you're ok with the way Mainstream (not extremist) Muslims treat, and define, women? Even in Progressive Muslim countries women are treated more like property than people. Not allowed to drive, can't shop in the same stores, can't divorce.. can't show their faces.. not supposed to be educated, can't work.. etc.. etc.. etc..

Whenever entire parts of the globe or entire countries start following extreme views, I'd say they are no longer the "extremists" but more the norm.

Just because I don't agree with how they live in other countries doesn't mean the religion should be outlawed here. That sort of treatment is not tolerated here and women can do all those things. This country is a work in progress and always will be, eventually we WILL treat all people equally; outlawing Islam is NOT a step in the right direction.

Wirelessly posted



Just because I don't agree with how they live in other countries doesn't mean the religion should be outlawed here. That sort of treatment is not tolerated here and women can do all those things. This country is a work in progress and always will be, eventually we WILL treat all people equally; outlawing Islam is NOT a step in the right direction.

So you're saying Muslim women in the US are equal to their husbands and are NOT treated like this in our country?

:bs:

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



Just because I don't agree with how they live in other countries doesn't mean the religion should be outlawed here. That sort of treatment is not tolerated here and women can do all those things. This country is a work in progress and always will be, eventually we WILL treat all people equally; outlawing Islam is NOT a step in the right direction.

So you're saying Muslim women in the US are equal to their husbands and are NOT treated like this in our country?

:bs:

You're right, some aren't but many are. There are plenty on non-Muslim treated just as poorly as some Muslim women but I don't see anyone trying to ban being an a-hole...

You present that as if you are the spokesperson for CAIR when you take small clippings out of old and irrelevant contexts.

Link here for CAIR = > Home < Council on American-Islamic Relations (http://www.cair.com/)

What I said in post #24 on page 3 (http://forums.somd.com/religion/229115-better-side-sharia-law-3.html#post4606228) of this thread is the correct interpretation, as is my posting #1 page 1 (http://forums.somd.com/religion/229115-better-side-sharia-law.html#post4605575).

:coffee:

BTW: Since you are a proponent of Sharia Law, there's a meeting scheduled for July 9, 2011 that you may be interested in. Here's some more info:


Are you ready for a world dominated by Islamic law?

On July 9, the international political group Hizb ut-Tahrir will meet for the “UK Khilafah Conference” in London. During the gathering, meetings will focus upon ways in which a caliphate can be instituted. As The Blaze explained back in February, a caliphate is an Islamic state that draws its authority from, and is based upon, Sharia law.

Hizb ut-Tahrir, which stands for the “Party of Liberation” in English, is an international political organization that seeks one, unified Muslim state that is dominated by Muslim law. This particular group stands firmly planted against the United States, accusing the Super Power of colonization, among other offenses.

Watch the trailer for the UK Khilafah Conference on 9th July at:
Are You Ready For a World Governed by Islamic Law? | Conservative Byte (http://conservativebyte.com/2011/06/are-you-ready-for-a-world-governed-by-islamic-law/)

Wirelessly posted



You're right, some aren't but many are. There are plenty on non-Muslim treated just as poorly as some Muslim women but I don't see anyone trying to ban being an a-hole...

That's because men can ne #######s without their religion requiring them to be.

I have a hard time believing ANY sane woman in this century would support a religion that treats women the way Muslim's do. What would you do if your employer had the same requirements? Would you still work for them? Would you buy their products?

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



You're right, some aren't but many are. There are plenty on non-Muslim treated just as poorly as some Muslim women but I don't see anyone trying to ban being an a-hole...

That's because men can ne #######s without their religion requiring them to be.

I have a hard time believing ANY sane woman in this century would support a religion that treats women the way Muslim's do. What would you do if your employer had the same requirements? Would you still work for them? Would you buy their products?

Stupid women stay with stupid men all the time. some even know before they marry them and STILL marry them! In the interest of fairness, men do the same thing. Don't underestimate the idiocy of someone desperate for approval.

BTW: Since you are a proponent of Sharia Law, there's a meeting scheduled for July 9, 2011 that you may be interested in. Here's some more info:


That conference appears to be a perfectly sensible thing for Islam to do, and I wish them well.

In Christianity it has the Pope and the Vatican as the Christian world headquarters, and many Christians still hope to reunite the Protestant Churches with their mother Catholicism, and they want new Christian laws and Christian Countries and Christian world domination, so it is only sensible that Islam would seek after the same.

In fact the concept of one-worldwide-religion is the same message given by Jesus Christ in saying and praying for the Kingdom of God being done on earth as it is in heaven.

The point of an Islamic Caliphate is equivalent to a Christian Pope, and then Islam would have a true spokesperson and ruling infrastructure to represent Islam to the rest of the world instead of having no such representation.

I see it as a very sensible and realistic goal, so I hope their conference succeeds.

:coffee:

The point of an Islamic Caliphate is equivalent to a Christian Pope, and then Islam would have a true spokesperson and ruling infrastructure to represent Islam to the rest of the world instead of having no such representation.

I see it as a very sensible and realistic goal, so I hope their conference succeeds.

:coffee:

Do you therefore give this same sentiment toward Israel in that Israel should be recognized as a nation by the Islamic world and that Jews/Israelis have been granted their land by God and have every right to be there with Jerusalem as their capitol and the Temple Mount a place to worship?

Wirelessly posted



Stupid women stay with stupid men all the time. some even know before they marry them and STILL marry them! In the interest of fairness, men do the same thing. Don't underestimate the idiocy of someone desperate for approval.

If stupid so chose to stay with their a-hole partner that's on them and their problem. That's their CHOICE, and some need to suffer for the choices they make. Women even CHOOSE to convert to Islam, knowing full well how they are to be treated and how they are supposed to act.. You can't help stupid.

What's the punishment for a woman BORN into a muslim family that choses to leave the faith?? Marry outside the faith?

That is NOT a choice. They are basically forced into a subservient role.

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



Stupid women stay with stupid men all the time. some even know before they marry them and STILL marry them! In the interest of fairness, men do the same thing. Don't underestimate the idiocy of someone desperate for approval.

If stupid so chose to stay with their a-hole partner that's on them and their problem. That's their CHOICE, and some need to suffer for the choices they make. Women even CHOOSE to convert to Islam, knowing full well how they are to be treated and how they are supposed to act.. You can't help stupid.

What's the punishment for a woman BORN into a muslim family that choses to leave the faith?? Marry outside the faith?

That is NOT a choice. They are basically forced into a subservient role.

And once they're in this country they're free to leave their Muslim families.

Wirelessly posted

And once they're in this country they're free to leave their Muslim families.

Perhaps they can leave their Muslim familes ( as in move away) BUT they CANNOT leave Islam. Otherwise.... Sharia Law proclaims that Muslim parents are to conduct an honor killing against apostate children. Ref. Rifqa Bary case who was fortunate to escape threats from her father when she converted to Christianity. Other young Muslim women were not as fortunate here in this country when they chose to fall in love with a Christian man or chose to leave the religion of Islam.

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted

And once they're in this country they're free to leave their Muslim families.

Perhaps they can leave their Muslim familes ( as in move away) BUT they CANNOT leave Islam. Otherwise.... Sharia Law proclaims that Muslim parents are to conduct an honor killing against apostate children. Ref. Rifqa Bary case who was fortunate to escape threats from her father when she converted to Christianity. Other young Muslim women were not as fortunate here in this country when they chose to fall in love with a Christian man or chose to leave the religion of Islam.

Timothy McVey killed 168 people in the name of Christianity so ban it too.

I'm not saying there aren't very bad Muslim, just like any group you have your extremes. But you cannot ban the faith based on this. Otherwise you wind up having to ban all sort of faiths and opinions. Hello Big Brother!

Wirelessly posted

Timothy McVey killed 168 people in the name of Christianity so ban it too.

I'm not saying there aren't very bad Muslim, just like any group you have your extremes. But you cannot ban the faith based on this. Otherwise you wind up having to ban all sort of faiths and opinions. Hello Big Brother!

This is not about banning the "religion" per sé; it's about banning the social/political edicts of the Islamic ideology that calls for Muslims to kill another Muslim who wishes to leave Islam. Or that prevents another Muslim who wishes to enjoy the protected rights to free speech and other freedoms that you and I have (right now) under the U.S. Constitution.

Islam becomes a security risk when the obligatory socio/political ordinances of Islam are implemented because they then become treasonous to the American way of life. Sharia Law is exactly like a "Big Brother" in that it establishes a Theocratic state with strict religious controls over the entire populace and subjects non-Muslims to second-class status.

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted

Timothy McVey killed 168 people in the name of Christianity so ban it too.

I'm not saying there aren't very bad Muslim, just like any group you have your extremes. But you cannot ban the faith based on this. Otherwise you wind up having to ban all sort of faiths and opinions. Hello Big Brother!

This is not about banning the "religion" per sé; it's about banning the social/political edicts of the Islamic ideology that calls for Muslims to kill another Muslim who wishes to leave Islam. Or that prevents another Muslim who wishes to enjoy the protected rights to free speech and other freedoms that you and I have (right now) under the U.S. Constitution.

Islam becomes a security risk when the obligatory socio/political ordinances of Islam are implemented because they then become treasonous to the American way of life. Sharia Law is exactly like a "Big Brother" in that it establishes a Theocratic state with strict religious controls over the entire populace and subjects non-Muslims to second-class status.

So just ban the acts? We have, murder is illegal

Or just ban the parts of their scripture that the extremists use to justify murder? Same for your Bible then!

Wirelessly posted

Same for your Bible then!

They have already been banned in the New Testament by Jesus' commands of Love your neighbor and your enemy, put away the sword, do good to others and pray for those who despitefully use you and say all manner of evil against you.

Islam implements Muhammad's commands that call for killing apostate Muslims, subjugating non-Muslims to second-class status, being at war with all mankind until the world comes under the rule of Islam.

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted

Same for your Bible then!

They have already been banned in the New Testament by Jesus' commands of Love your neighbor and your enemy, put away the sword, do good to others and pray for those who despitefully use you and say all manner of evil against you.

Islam implements Muhammad's commands that call for killing apostate Muslims, subjugating non-Muslims to second-class status, being at war with all mankind until the world comes under the rule of Islam.

So absolutely no one EVER interprets verses like Luke 19 as an instruction to slaughter non believers? EVER?! Not saying that IS what it means, just that someone might interpret it that way.

Wirelessly posted

So absolutely no one EVER interprets verses like Luke 19 as an instruction to slaughter non believers? EVER?! Not saying that IS what it means, just that someone might interpret it that way.

That was a parable not a command of Jesus and any person who invokes Luke 19 to justify such act is a murderer.

On the other hand, the Qur'an and Ahadith clearly specify that Muslims are to fight against "the Unbelievers" until they accept Allah and regard Muhammad as the last and final prophet. His orders are to persecute and kill Jews and non-Muslims and, according to Muhammad, those Muslims who die in waging their jihad against unbelievers will gain immediate entry into the Islamic paradise and receive the rewards of non-intoxicating wine, fruit, extravagant apparel and voluptuous dark-eyed virgin women, of equal age.

... those Muslims who die in waging their jihad against unbelievers will gain immediate entry into the Islamic paradise and receive the rewards of non-intoxicating wine, fruit, extravagant apparel and voluptuous dark-eyed virgin women, of equal age.You are supposed to be discouraging us from joining!

Wirelessly posted



Timothy McVey killed 168 people in the name of Christianity so ban it too.

I'm not saying there aren't very bad Muslim, just like any group you have your extremes. But you cannot ban the faith based on this. Otherwise you wind up having to ban all sort of faiths and opinions. Hello Big Brother!
The last thing on Timothy McVeigh's mind was Christianity. He was a white supremacist with a grudge against the ATF for the handling of the Branch Davidians at Waco.

You are supposed to be discouraging us from joining!

That's what prompts Islamic Jihadists to strap bombs on their bodies and blow themselves up in a crowd of "Infidels". They really believe that their god, Al'lah, will grant them immediate entry into the Islamic paradise with all the "promised rewards".

Islam celebrates such death of their "martyrs" and that's why suicide bombings and terror attacks will continue.

You are supposed to be discouraging us from joining!



If you've ever talked to a Navy Recruiter, you would definitely take all those promises with a grain of salt.

Do you therefore give this same sentiment toward Israel in that Israel should be recognized as a nation by the Islamic world and that Jews/Israelis have been granted their land by God and have every right to be there with Jerusalem as their capitol and the Temple Mount a place to worship?


No, that is super far away from the same equation.

The Muslim quest for a Caliphate is a non violent and respectful effort to improve themselves, while the State of Israel is founded and built on theft and occupation and wanton murders. If one sees "God" (by any name) as being just and loving then the former is the one serving that God, but if one views their God as an evil tyrant then the latter would be its servant. Note: I really do like Jews and Judaism just as I like Islam and Christianity, but I do not like any of their sins.

Another factor is that the Christian support of the Country of Israel is based on a truly perverted idea that the Jews will reclaim the temple mount and start up Jewish sacrifices as an abomination, so then Christ is to return and Christ (per wrongful Christian interpretation) is to wipe out both the Muslims and the Jews and the righteous Christians are to move in and take over the place. Which means the Christian support for the Jewish State is far from ethical.

Of course in that self serving "prophesy" the Christians declare that the few Jews and Muslims that will be saved from the prophetic slaughter will be only those that do convert to the Christianity. That interpretation of the Bible is not correct but being incorrect has not stopped them yet.

:buddies:

The fact is that there is no set rules under Sharia law, and it is entirely up to different interpretations and definitions, and it is not set in stone.

Link wikipedia here = Sharia Law as interpreted (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#Schools_of_thought).

Link = Sharia law: A brief introduction (http://www.religioustolerance.org/islsharia.htm)

The Sharia law only applies to Muslims, in how they live within their religion.

And Sharia Law calls for the respect of Christianity and for Judaism - the people of the book (the Bible).

:drummer:

This guy is so whacked!:diva:

This guy is so whacked!:diva:

Anyone who has to read more than 2 of his posts to figure that out is incredibly slow.

Anyone who has to read more than 2 of his posts to figure that out is incredibly slow.

Newbie here Merlin. First post I've seen of his. Have a nice evening!

Wirelessly posted

So absolutely no one EVER interprets verses like Luke 19 as an instruction to slaughter non believers? EVER?! Not saying that IS what it means, just that someone might interpret it that way.

That was a parable not a command of Jesus and any person who invokes Luke 19 to justify such act is a murderer.

On the other hand, the Qur'an and Ahadith clearly specify that Muslims are to fight against "the Unbelievers" until they accept Allah and regard Muhammad as the last and final prophet. His orders are to persecute and kill Jews and non-Muslims and, according to Muhammad, those Muslims who die in waging their jihad against unbelievers will gain immediate entry into the Islamic paradise and receive the rewards of non-intoxicating wine, fruit, extravagant apparel and voluptuous dark-eyed virgin women, of equal age.

Yes, you interpret it as such but not all do. Christians kill in the name of God so by your logic it should be outlawed or at least controlled.

Newbie here Merlin. First post I've seen of his. Have a nice evening!

Welcome to the discussions tennispro12. Looks like the first serve back to you was a zinger but I'm sure Merlin meant no ill. When you play in this court you'll soon find out that with some people (like in the game of tennis) LOVE means nothing! LOL

Welcome :buddies:

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



Timothy McVey killed 168 people in the name of Christianity so ban it too.

I'm not saying there aren't very bad Muslim, just like any group you have your extremes. But you cannot ban the faith based on this. Otherwise you wind up having to ban all sort of faiths and opinions. Hello Big Brother!
The last thing on Timothy McVeigh's mind was Christianity. He was a white supremacist with a grudge against the ATF for the handling of the Branch Davidians at Waco.

I thought he was also an extremist; I could be wrong.

Welcome to the discussions tennispro12. Looks like the first serve back to you was a zinger but I'm sure Merlin meant no ill. When you play in this court you'll soon find out that with some people (like in the game of tennis) LOVE means nothing! LOL

Welcome :buddies:

hahahahah thanks! But, maybe I really am s-l-o-wwwwwww. LOL
no ill taken.

That guy really is whacked though! :diva:

OK, I know this is really long but I'm making a point...

Christian Terrorism:
The Christian persecution of Paganism
The destruction of the Pagan religion
Law banning all religions other than Christianity
Edicts against non-Christian worship
Destruction of temples
The burning of non-Christian books
Marco Antonio de Dominis tortured and murdered by Rome in 1624 for his investigations in the phenomena of light
Heliocentrism, Giordana Bruno, Galileo Galilei, Campanella and Copernicus
The Christian inquisition and slavery
ww2 : Christianity and anti-semitism
Christians encourage the destruction of books in modern times
The religious involvement in the Rwandan genocide
African Children Denounced As “Witches” By Christian Pastors
Ugandans use Christian Bible to justify ritual sacrifice of children
Serbian genocide of Muslims in the 20th Century
Protestant death squads in Northern Ireland
Protestant terrorist organisation, The Orange Volunteers
The pope and the sex abuse scandal
Child molestation in the boy scouts
Pastor’s wife fasts for three weeks then dies
Andrea Yates
American Family Association wants to stone to death the killer whale who killed his trainer in accordance with the OT
Sexism in modern Christianity (OK, not terrorism but an argument used against Islam)
Pastor Pat Robertson says Haiti deserved the earthquake
Anti-Semitic Romanian Orthodox fascist movements in Romania
Sons of Freedom
National Liberation Front of Tripura
The Nagaland Rebels of Nagaland
The Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda
The Klu Klux Klan
Apartheid in South Africa and the Christian Dutch Reformed Church
The Afrikaans Resistance Movement
The Christian Identity Movement
The Christian Patriot Movement
Concerned Christians (Isreal)
Mass Christian suicides (Jonestown)
God's Avenging Army
Repent Amarillo
Hutaree
The Lambs of Christ
Scott Roeder
Westboro Baptist Church

Not all Christians are 'bad' but some are. Just like in ANY group, there are nuts. I know Muslims have a violent element, maybe more than Christians but you can't condemn a whole group as 'evil' for the acts of a - relative - few extremists while ignoring the extremists in your own group. We don't identify all Christians with these nuts, not should we. So don't so it to Muslims.

That is all :smile:

OK, I know this is really long but I'm making a point...

Christian Terrorism:
The Christian persecution of Paganism
The destruction of the Pagan religion
Law banning all religions other than Christianity
Edicts against non-Christian worship
Destruction of temples
The burning of non-Christian books
Marco Antonio de Dominis tortured and murdered by Rome in 1624 for his investigations in the phenomena of light
Heliocentrism, Giordana Bruno, Galileo Galilei, Campanella and Copernicus
The Christian inquisition and slavery
ww2 : Christianity and anti-semitism
Christians encourage the destruction of books in modern times
The religious involvement in the Rwandan genocide
African Children Denounced As “Witches” By Christian Pastors
Ugandans use Christian Bible to justify ritual sacrifice of children
Serbian genocide of Muslims in the 20th Century
Protestant death squads in Northern Ireland
Protestant terrorist organisation, The Orange Volunteers
The pope and the sex abuse scandal
Child molestation in the boy scouts
Pastor’s wife fasts for three weeks then dies
Andrea Yates
American Family Association wants to stone to death the killer whale who killed his trainer in accordance with the OT
Sexism in modern Christianity (OK, not terrorism but an argument used against Islam)
Pastor Pat Robertson says Haiti deserved the earthquake
Anti-Semitic Romanian Orthodox fascist movements in Romania
Sons of Freedom
National Liberation Front of Tripura
The Nagaland Rebels of Nagaland
The Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda
The Klu Klux Klan
Apartheid in South Africa and the Christian Dutch Reformed Church
The Afrikaans Resistance Movement
The Christian Identity Movement
The Christian Patriot Movement
Concerned Christians (Isreal)
Mass Christian suicides (Jonestown)
God's Avenging Army
Repent Amarillo
Hutaree
The Lambs of Christ
Scott Roeder
Westboro Baptist Church

Not all Christians are 'bad' but some are. Just like in ANY group, there are nuts. I know Muslims have a violent element, maybe more than Christians but you can't condemn a whole group as 'evil' for the acts of a - relative - few extremists while ignoring the extremists in your own group. We don't identify all Christians with these nuts, not should we. So don't so it to Muslims.

That is all :smile:

I’m not sure if you’re trying to make Christians out to be just as bad as Muslims or if you’re trying to justify bad behavior by pointing at other bad behavior. You make a pretty good argument, because Christianity most certainly has a horrendous past; but where it falls apart is there is no global effort by Christians to terrorize the world to convert to Christianity. Some of your examples are easily discredited as actually being ‘Christian’.

You don’t have Christians hijacking planes and crashing them into buildings. You don’t have Christians strapping bombs to themselves and walking into unsuspecting civilian places to butcher innocent people, especially children. You don’t have Christians calling for the destruction of entire nations. Can you name any Christian nations? Can you tell me what nation has laws that demand they observe only Christianity and any other religion is forbidden and if you observe any other religion you can be arrested and executed? I can name many Muslim countries that have extremely oppressive and intolerant laws that place certain groups (like women) as second class dogs. These countries will most certainly punish you in a most brutal way for not observing the Islamic faith. These aren’t just rogue factions within the Muslim faith; these are entire nations that hold a belief that anyone not Muslim is the enemy, and this is enforced by denying any sort of freedom to practice any other faith. You are the enemy if you attempt to practice Christianity in these countries and will be treated as an enemy by being put to death for practice your faith. You don’t dare set foot in a Mosque if you are not Muslim. Can this be said for Christian churches?

Trying to make any sort of comparison between the Christian and Muslim faiths completely ignores the extent that Muslims have gone to force their religion as law through Sharia; and they desire an Islamic global caliphate through instituting Wahhabism. They intend to enforce this through violent and extreme measures that are aimed to inflict fear and terror in those who don’t believe. They don’t intend to spread their faith through a loving and peaceful way as Christians do. I agree this was not the case 700 – 800 years ago. I agree some groups (like Nazis and the KKK) used Christianity as a means to push their evil agendas, but they were/are not Christian groups. Christians reject those that would use our faith in such evil ways; unlike the larger Muslim community that refuses to condemn terrorism and take up the battle against terrorism. Christians – as a whole – rejected Nazism, the KKK, Westboro, Apartheid, and all of your other more modern examples of ‘Christian terrorism’. Those rogue factions do not equate to a faith that has swallowed up entire nations with an extremely hateful and intolerant practice of their faith; countries that back groups (like al Qaeda) to inflict fear of Islam all over the world.

And as I type this I am seeing a report that Delta Airlines is making a deal with Saudi Arabian Airlines that flights to Saudi Arabian will forbid Jewish passengers and bibles. Hmmm… I wonder if there is any deal with the Israelis to forbid travel of Muslims to Israel? You can’t tell me this religion has one ounce of tolerance for anyone not Muslim. Trying to support this argument is a failed argument.

I’m not sure if you’re trying to make Christians out to be just as bad as Muslims or if you’re trying to justify bad behavior by pointing at other bad behavior. You make a pretty good argument, because Christianity most certainly has a horrendous past; but where it falls apart is there is no global effort by Christians to terrorize the world to convert to Christianity. Some of your examples are easily discredited as actually being ‘Christian’.

You don’t have Christians hijacking planes and crashing them into buildings. You don’t have Christians strapping bombs to themselves and walking into unsuspecting civilian places to butcher innocent people, especially children. You don’t have Christians calling for the destruction of entire nations. Can you name any Christian nations? Can you tell me what nation has laws that demand they observe only Christianity and any other religion is forbidden and if you observe any other religion you can be arrested and executed? I can name many Muslim countries that have extremely oppressive and intolerant laws that place certain groups (like women) as second class dogs. These countries will most certainly punish you in a most brutal way for not observing the Islamic faith. These aren’t just rogue factions within the Muslim faith; these are entire nations that hold a belief that anyone not Muslim is the enemy, and this is enforced by denying any sort of freedom to practice any other faith. You are the enemy if you attempt to practice Christianity in these countries and will be treated as an enemy by being put to death for practice your faith. You don’t dare set foot in a Mosque if you are not Muslim. Can this be said for Christian churches?

Trying to make any sort of comparison between the Christian and Muslim faiths completely ignores the extent that Muslims have gone to force their religion as law through Sharia; and they desire an Islamic global caliphate through instituting Wahhabism. They intend to enforce this through violent and extreme measures that are aimed to inflict fear and terror in those who don’t believe. They don’t intend to spread their faith through a loving and peaceful way as Christians do. I agree this was not the case 700 – 800 years ago. I agree some groups (like Nazis and the KKK) used Christianity as a means to push their evil agendas, but they were/are not Christian groups. Christians reject those that would use our faith in such evil ways; unlike the larger Muslim community that refuses to condemn terrorism and take up the battle against terrorism. Christians – as a whole – rejected Nazism, the KKK, Westboro, Apartheid, and all of your other more modern examples of ‘Christian terrorism’. Those rogue factions do not equate to a faith that has swallowed up entire nations with an extremely hateful and intolerant practice of their faith; countries that back groups (like al Qaeda) to inflict fear of Islam all over the world.

And as I type this I am seeing a report that Delta Airlines is making a deal with Saudi Arabian Airlines that flights to Saudi Arabian will forbid Jewish passengers and bibles. Hmmm… I wonder if there is any deal with the Israelis to forbid travel of Muslims to Israel? You can’t tell me this religion has one ounce of tolerance for anyone not Muslim. Trying to support this argument is a failed argument.

:yeahthat:
Excellent comments PsyOps! :yay:

Wirelessly posted

I'm not sure if you're trying to make Christians out to be just as bad as Muslims or if you're trying to justify bad behavior by pointing at other bad behavior. You make a pretty good argument, because Christianity most certainly has a horrendous past; but where it falls apart is there is no global effort by Christians to terrorize the world to convert to Christianity. Some of your examples are easily discredited as actually being ‘Christian'.

You don't have Christians hijacking planes and crashing them into buildings. You don't have Christians strapping bombs to themselves and walking into unsuspecting civilian places to butcher innocent people, especially children. You don't have Christians calling for the destruction of entire nations. Can you name any Christian nations? Can you tell me what nation has laws that demand they observe only Christianity and any other religion is forbidden and if you observe any other religion you can be arrested and executed? I can name many Muslim countries that have extremely oppressive and intolerant laws that place certain groups (like women) as second class dogs. These countries will most certainly punish you in a most brutal way for not observing the Islamic faith. These aren't just rogue factions within the Muslim faith; these are entire nations that hold a belief that anyone not Muslim is the enemy, and this is enforced by denying any sort of freedom to practice any other faith. You are the enemy if you attempt to practice Christianity in these countries and will be treated as an enemy by being put to death for practice your faith. You don't dare set foot in a Mosque if you are not Muslim. Can this be said for Christian churches?

Trying to make any sort of comparison between the Christian and Muslim faiths completely ignores the extent that Muslims have gone to force their religion as law through Sharia; and they desire an Islamic global caliphate through instituting Wahhabism. They intend to enforce this through violent and extreme measures that are aimed to inflict fear and terror in those who don't believe. They don't intend to spread their faith through a loving and peaceful way as Christians do. I agree this was not the case 700 - 800 years ago. I agree some groups (like Nazis and the KKK) used Christianity as a means to push their evil agendas, but they were/are not Christian groups. Christians reject those that would use our faith in such evil ways; unlike the larger Muslim community that refuses to condemn terrorism and take up the battle against terrorism. Christians - as a whole - rejected Nazism, the KKK, Westboro, Apartheid, and all of your other more modern examples of ‘Christian terrorism'. Those rogue factions do not equate to a faith that has swallowed up entire nations with an extremely hateful and intolerant practice of their faith; countries that back groups (like al Qaeda) to inflict fear of Islam all over the world.

And as I type this I am seeing a report that Delta Airlines is making a deal with Saudi Arabian Airlines that flights to Saudi Arabian will forbid Jewish passengers and bibles. Hmmm… I wonder if there is any deal with the Israelis to forbid travel of Muslims to Israel? You can't tell me this religion has one ounce of tolerance for anyone not Muslim. Trying to support this argument is a failed argument.

I don't mean to look like I'm defending Islam's extremists nor that Christians are 'just as bad' because they're - currently - not. Just that there is a history of violence. I don't expect anyone to defend it either. I just want people to see the history. People may look at this list and say "that person wasn't really Christian", or "that doesn't count because these nuts don't represent all Christians" and I agree! But these same argument are used by non-extremist Muslims too! non-extremist Muslims reject their nuts just like non-extremist Christians reject their nuts!

So I didn't mean to imply defense nor comparison and I apologize if that'd how it looked! Just wanted to make a point :smile:

Wirelessly posted



I don't mean to look like I'm defending Islam's extremists nor that Christians are 'just as bad' because they're - currently - not. Just that there is a history of violence. I don't expect anyone to defend it either. I just want people to see the history. People may look at this list and say "that person wasn't really Christian", or "that doesn't count because these nuts don't represent all Christians" and I agree! But these same argument are used by non-extremist Muslims too! non-extremist Muslims reject their nuts just like non-extremist Christians reject their nuts!

So I didn't mean to imply defense nor comparison and I apologize if that'd how it looked! Just wanted to make a point :smile:

Of course there is history to refer to, UNA, so when you look at the overall history of Islam from its very beginning in the year 610 you will find that it has been an ongoing struggle to dominate other cultures and to establish a worldwide Islamic Theocracy governed by Sharia Law. Additionally, the ongoing violence and power struggle between the two main sects of Islam (Sunni and Shia) has also been going on throughout the centuries since the death of Muhammad in the year 632.

The point is, Islam has never really established peace with non-Muslims nor among themselves!

Islam does not mean "peace" - Islam means "SUBMISSION".

Research (http://www.Starman3000.com)

The point is, Islam has never really established peace with non-Muslims nor among themselves!Does that mean it never will? If Christianity can evolve, can the same not happen for Islam? :shrug:

Wirelessly posted

The point is, Islam has never really established peace with non-Muslims nor among themselves!Does that mean it never will? If Christianity can evolve, can the same not happen for Islam? :shrug:

Because their the DEVIL!

Because their the DEVIL!How could I forget? :whack:

Wirelessly posted



I don't mean to look like I'm defending Islam's extremists nor that Christians are 'just as bad' because they're - currently - not. Just that there is a history of violence. I don't expect anyone to defend it either. I just want people to see the history. People may look at this list and say "that person wasn't really Christian", or "that doesn't count because these nuts don't represent all Christians" and I agree! But these same argument are used by non-extremist Muslims too! non-extremist Muslims reject their nuts just like non-extremist Christians reject their nuts!

So I didn't mean to imply defense nor comparison and I apologize if that'd how it looked! Just wanted to make a point :smile:

I think everyone that frequents this forum knows the violent history of Christianity.

I would contend that from where the vast majority of these extremists come from (the mid east), most hold extreme views. I tried to point out to you their religious practices demand anyone that is not Muslim is the enemy. They institute this in their laws and religious teachings. Compound this with their oppressive practices to keep their own people down creates an environment of widespread hate. People in these countries, because of the oppressive regimes that rule them, they have huge populations of uneducated and uninformed people; making it easy to brainwash and recruit them to a violent cause. The one thing that got Christianity on track is education the free flow of information.

We can cast stones in all sorts of directions but we are in this place, fighting a battle with a people that want us dead. As much as I hate nation-building the only way I see out of this is to either completely isolate these people, bring them to their knees, or try to bring a more civilized lifestyle to them. I only see the last option as the most viable solution if we are to expect any sort of global peace. If you have one ounce of understanding of how these people view our world, then you understand the violence wont end if we just try to wish it away or pretend it’s not that big of a problem.

Wirelessly posted



And once they're in this country they're free to leave their Muslim families.

:bs:
I can't believe that anyone would believe because they move to a different country that they believe the rules of their church and their husbands would be null and void.
And aren't our courts debating this now, treating Muslims in our courts according to their religion?

The WOMEN may think the US is the answer but the men and Imams do not.

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



I don't mean to look like I'm defending Islam's extremists nor that Christians are 'just as bad' because they're - currently - not. Just that there is a history of violence. I don't expect anyone to defend it either. I just want people to see the history. People may look at this list and say "that person wasn't really Christian", or "that doesn't count because these nuts don't represent all Christians" and I agree! But these same argument are used by non-extremist Muslims too! non-extremist Muslims reject their nuts just like non-extremist Christians reject their nuts!

So I didn't mean to imply defense nor comparison and I apologize if that'd how it looked! Just wanted to make a point :smile:

I think everyone that frequents this forum knows the violent history of Christianity.

I would contend that from where the vast majority of these extremists come from (the mid east), most hold extreme views. I tried to point out to you their religious practices demand anyone that is not Muslim is the enemy. They institute this in their laws and religious teachings. Compound this with their oppressive practices to keep their own people down creates an environment of widespread hate. People in these countries, because of the oppressive regimes that rule them, they have huge populations of uneducated and uninformed people; making it easy to brainwash and recruit them to a violent cause. The one thing that got Christianity on track is education the free flow of information.

We can cast stones in all sorts of directions but we are in this place, fighting a battle with a people that want us dead. As much as I hate nation-building the only way I see out of this is to either completely isolate these people, bring them to their knees, or try to bring a more civilized lifestyle to them. I only see the last option as the most viable solution if we are to expect any sort of global peace. If you have one ounce of understanding of how these people view our world, then you understand the violence wont end if we just try to wish it away or pretend it’s not that big of a problem.

It's their govt's though, not necessarily them. We're beginning to see this with the revolutions over there! I think we need to see how current events unfold before we begin nation building again (which IMO is not the answer but that's beside the point :smile: )

Wirelessly posted



And once they're in this country they're free to leave their Muslim families.

:bs:
I can't believe that anyone would believe because they move to a different country that they believe the rules of their church and their husbands would be null and void.
And aren't our courts debating this now, treating Muslims in our courts according to their religion?

The WOMEN may think the US is the answer but the men and Imams do not.

I know it's not usually as easy as 'just leaving' but there ARE those for whom it often is. You have to remember that for as much as you probably dislike the generations coming up after you they are often of a different mindset than this. A lot of times it's EXACTLY why they came here.

We need to enforce our laws in out courts, not theirs.

Islam does not mean "peace" - Islam means "SUBMISSION".


Islam means submission-to-God.

As in Christians submitting to God, Jews submitting to God and Muslims submitting to God.

It does not mean SUBMISSION as submission to people nor to governments.

Islam is the religion of peace, but it means peace through justice and truth, as in peace through God.

FYI.

:whistle:

It's their govt's though, not necessarily them. We're beginning to see this with the revolutions over there! I think we need to see how current events unfold before we begin nation building again (which IMO is not the answer but that's beside the point :smile: )

The one thing about these ‘revolutions’ is they are inspired by our presence. A little taste of democracy, freedom, can go a long way to change. But, in a region like the mid east, this doesn’t happen in a vacuum; devoid of an influence. It may not be a perfect ‘democracy’ but it’s far better than the oppression they lived under before.

We can call it nation building, but it is – after all – a benefit of war (or consequence depending on how you look at it). It happened in Europe, Japan, Korea, and other countries where we defeated our enemies. We take responsibility for countries that we destroy and try to rebuild them in a way we can envision as better than before we defeated them. Our moral influence turned out to be what was best for places like Germany, Japan, and South Korea. How is it this country’s attitude has changed so much since? If it is governments, as you stated, aren’t we doing the morally right thing by liberating these people their oppression? Do human rights only apply to how certain people, in their political correctness, define it?

And once they're in this country they're free to leave their Muslim families.

I can't believe that anyone would believe because they move to a different country that they believe the rules of their church and their husbands would be null and void.
And aren't our courts debating this now, treating Muslims in our courts according to their religion?

The WOMEN may think the US is the answer but the men and Imams do not.

It is true that under American laws the religious bonds of marriage are completely undermined as American laws do NOT uphold any marriage of any religion.

In America the Custody laws will legally take the child(ren) away from one parent (usually from the Dad) and then order the Child Support and send to hell (the grave) the religious Institution of marriage.

It truly does make sense that if our American and State laws are to respect the people's religions then the Courts need to consider and respect the Christian doctrines for Christian marriages (as in divorces) and respect Islamic doctrine for Muslim marriages, Jewish for Jews and Hindu for Hindus, because as it is now the State laws violate the religious Institution of marriage and now the USA is the divorce and broken family capital of the world.

If "bob" above is correct that our Courts are considering Islamic traditions for Muslim marriages then it will indeed be ironic if Muslim law leads the way to Court reform of our American divorce industry.

:coffee:

:blahblah::blahblah::blahblah: Child Support :blahblah::blahblah:

And we have finally come full circle to JPC's main argument with anything!!!

:stupid:

You really need to share some of your stash.

I think ":cool: High!!!" would be more fitting for your subtitles, JMHO...

If "bob" above is correct that our Courts are considering Islamic traditions for Muslim marriages then it will indeed be ironic if Muslim law leads the way to Court reform of our American divorce industry.

:coffee:

Umm.. you are aware of how easy it is for the husband to obtain a divorce under Sharia Law aren't you???

All a Muslim husband needs to say to one of his four wives (three times in succession) is "I Divorce You" and the divorce is valid. The Muslim wife, however, cannot file for nor obtain a divorce from an abusive husband as easily.
(Yes, Muslim men are legally allowed to have up to four wives)

Is that how you would like the American divorce system to be patterned after???

Is that how you would like the American divorce system to be patterned after???


No, but allowing a man to have 4 wives also explains why so many of them feel the need to blow themselves up.











Ouch... that was wrong on so many levels.

No, but allowing a man to have 4 wives also explains why so many of them feel the need to blow themselves up.


:killingme

On the other hand, part of the promised "reward" to the martyr (according to the Qur'an and Ahadith) is that he will be given voluptuous wide-eyed women, virgins of equal age, with whom he can spend eternity with while drinking non-intoxicating wine and reclining among lush gardens.

It is true that under American laws the religious bonds of marriage are completely undermined as American laws do NOT uphold any marriage of any religion.

In America the Custody laws will legally take the child(ren) away from one parent (usually from the Dad) and then order the Child Support and send to hell (the grave) the religious Institution of marriage.

It truly does make sense that if our American and State laws are to respect the people's religions then the Courts need to consider and respect the Christian doctrines for Christian marriages (as in divorces) and respect Islamic doctrine for Muslim marriages, Jewish for Jews and Hindu for Hindus, because as it is now the State laws violate the religious Institution of marriage and now the USA is the divorce and broken family capital of the world.

If "bob" above is correct that our Courts are considering Islamic traditions for Muslim marriages then it will indeed be ironic if Muslim law leads the way to Court reform of our American divorce industry.

:coffee:

Wait....are you saying that marriage/divorce will be better under Sharia Law?
:looksaroundveryworried:

...the USA is the divorce and broken family capital of the world...

Go cry yourself a river; Sharia Law won't fix this.

Wait....are you saying that marriage/divorce will be better under Sharia Law?
:looksaroundveryworried:


Sharia law only means religious law, and it does have many variations and interpretations, but it is always based on the perception as law according to the principles of God.

My point is that MARRIAGE was an institution of religion which has been violated by State authority and now we have a mess going on.

So I do say that marriage and parenting would be better if governed by religious law and not by State legislation and Court orders.

Christianity has its own version of Sharia Law just as Hindu have their own religious doctrines and even native aboriginal groups had their own dictates for marriage but now the State has violated the religious institution of marriage which makes the USA into the divorce and broken family capital of the world.

Muslims and Hindus and other faiths including Christians from other Countries come to the USA and find out that American laws threaten their families and undermines their religious principles and all enforced by State laws that destroy families, and this makes the USA into a Country of legalized adultery and licentiousness.

I say it is okay for Muslims to be married under Islamic law and Christians to be married under Christian authority and I say the State laws have already violated the Church.

What we really need is for Churches (religions) to reclaim their authority and boot the State out of their religious prerogatives - and would not that be a revolution indeed?

:coffee:

Sharia law only means religious law, and it does have many variations and interpretations, but it is always based on the perception as law according to the principles of God.

My point is that MARRIAGE was an institution of religion which has been violated by State authority and now we have a mess going on.

So I do say that marriage and parenting would be better if governed by religious law and not by State legislation and Court orders.

Christianity has its own version of Sharia Law just as Hindu have their own religious doctrines and even native aboriginal groups had their own dictates for marriage but now the State has violated the religious institution of marriage which makes the USA into the divorce and broken family capital of the world.

Muslims and Hindus and other faiths including Christians from other Countries come to the USA and find out that American laws threaten their families and undermines their religious principles and all enforced by State laws that destroy families, and this makes the USA into a Country of legalized adultery and licentiousness.

I say it is okay for Muslims to be married under Islamic law and Christians to be married under Christian authority and I say the State laws have already violated the Church.

What we really need is for Churches (religions) to reclaim their authority and boot the State out of their religious prerogatives - and would not that be a revolution indeed?

:coffee:

Incoherent

Wait....are you saying that marriage/divorce will be better under Sharia Law?
:looksaroundveryworried:

Please... don't waste your time.

Christianity has its own version of Sharia Law just as Hindu have their own religious doctrines and even native aboriginal groups had their own dictates for marriage but now the State has violated the religious institution of marriage which makes the USA into the divorce and broken family capital of the world.

You are steadfast in your message and agenda. Whatever your agenda is, I don't think it is good for this, perhaps any, country or yourself.

Whatever your agenda is, I don't think it is good

His agenda is to justify and validate the behavior of parents who abandon their children, their responsibility, in favor of a life of self-service and self-indulgence, while the responsible parent - should there be one, otherwise any random sucker with a sense of duty will suffice - is stuck with the financial burden until the child turns 18 years of age.

In other words, he is the only candidate in the history of the United States who is 100% in favor of dead-beat-parentism. He is not only in favor of it, he has made it his centerpiece, although this time around, it's not quite so in-yer-face. (Maybe he thinks he can sneak it in).

He also considers himself some kind of Renaissance Man looking for a way to be of all religions, yet none of them.

He also suffers from acute "Self-Loathing White-Guy-itis" from time to time.

Wirelessly posted

Whatever your agenda is, I don't think it is good

His agenda is to justify and validate the behavior of parents who abandon their children, their responsibility, in favor of a life of self-service and self-indulgence, while the responsible parent - should there be one, otherwise any random sucker with a sense of duty will suffice - is stuck with the financial burden until the child turns 18 years of age.

In other words, he is the only candidate in the history of the United States who is 100% in favor of dead-beat-parentism. He is not only in favor of it, he has made it his centerpiece, although this time around, it's not quite so in-yer-face. (Maybe he thinks he can sneak it in).

He also considers himself some kind of Renaissance Man looking for a way to be of all religions, yet none of them.

He also suffers from acute "Self-Loathing White-Guy-itis" from time to time.

Wow, as a relative newbie, I had no idea! Who is this guy? He's running for office? (still kind of a newbie to StM co too...came from Calvert...)

Wow, as a relative newbie, I had no idea! Who is this guy? He's running for office? (still kind of a newbie to StM co too...came from Calvert...)



He's John P. Cusick, Esq. AKA: Rooster Cogburn, AKA: Mr. Short Bus.

So far he's run for State Legislature (2006), U.S. House of Representatives (2008) and now apparently the United States Senate.


All I know is that the Presidential Candidates in 2016 have no idea what's going to hit them.

He's John P. Cusick, Esq. AKA: Rooster Cogburn, AKA: Mr. Short Bus.

So far he's run for State Legislature (2006), U.S. House of Representatives (2008) and now apparently the United States Senate.


All I know is that the Presidential Candidates in 2016 have no idea what's going to hit them.

Too damned funny TOXICK - so sad that every word you wrote in this thread today is true.

(note: not sad that you wrote truisms...sad that it is true about JPC. Didn't want you to misunderstand me)

Wirelessly posted

Wow, as a relative newbie, I had no idea! Who is this guy? He's running for office? (still kind of a newbie to StM co too...came from Calvert...)



He's John P. Cusick, Esq. AKA: Rooster Cogburn, AKA: Mr. Short Bus.

So far he's run for State Legislature (2006), U.S. House of Representatives (2008) and now apparently the United States Senate.


All I know is that the Presidential Candidates in 2016 have no idea what's going to hit them.

Ahahahahaha! I hope he's not calling himself Rooster Cogburn, somehow I doubt the Duke would take kindly to that comparison. "Fill your hands, you son of a b****!" :killingme

Wirelessly posted



Ahahahahaha! I hope he's not calling himself Rooster Cogburn, somehow I doubt the Duke would take kindly to that comparison. "Fill your hands, you son of a b****!" :killingme



That's how he signed his posts in 2010 when he was running for Governor.




I kid you not.

(How could I forget his Gubernatorial run :doh:)

...He also suffers from acute "Self-Loathing White-Guy-itis" from time to time.

How-about a play on words?

"acute obtuseness"

How-about a play on words?

"acute obtuseness"




very apt.

:killingme

On the other hand, part of the promised "reward" to the martyr (according to the Qur'an and Ahadith) is that he will be given voluptuous wide-eyed women, virgins of equal age, with whom he can spend eternity with while drinking non-intoxicating wine and reclining among lush gardens.

Why the hell would you do that?

He's John P. Cusick, Esq.James, not John.


AKA: Mr. Short Bus.Yes, he LOVES that smiley! :shortbus:



I hope he's not calling himself Rooster Cogburn...No, but he has called himself "The Messenger" and, naturally, Batman. There were others I cannot remember.

Overall, he will post loads (double entendre alert) of infuriating, entirely delusional stuff, but once you realize that he will never have an effect on anyone's life but his own he is rather entertaining.

:yeahthat:
Excellent comments PsyOps! :yay:

Yeah that!:boxing:

Wait....are you saying that marriage/divorce will be better under Sharia Law?
:looksaroundveryworried:

only a true libtard or Muslim man would agree

Wirelessly posted



Wow, as a relative newbie, I had no idea! Who is this guy? He's running for office? (still kind of a newbie to StM co too...came from Calvert...)

sounds like a lawyer, libtard very whacked indeed shortbus sounds about right for him. Does he call himself that?

That's how he signed his posts in 2010 when he was running for Governor.




I kid you not.

(How could I forget his Gubernatorial run :doh:)

He's got my vote :) remind me to ask anyone at work if they heard of this guy

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



Ahahahahaha! I hope he's not calling himself Rooster Cogburn, somehow I doubt the Duke would take kindly to that comparison. "Fill your hands, you son of a b****!" :killingme



That's how he signed his posts in 2010 when he was running for Governor.




I kid you not.

(How could I forget his Gubernatorial run :doh:)

O. M. G.

He's rolling over in his grave.

"Imagine no religion, it's easy if you try" ~John Lennon

I think everyone that frequents this forum knows the violent history of Christianity.


I do believe that the point is that your hypocrisy and self-righteousness is painfully obvious and reprehensible.

Particularly as noted in the quote below.


We can cast stones in all sorts of directions but we are in this place, fighting a battle with a people that want us dead.


It is your self (and your kind) that wants them dead.

We are the ones sending our military onto the other side of the planet to kill and murder them.

:coffee:

I do believe that the point is that your hypocrisy and self-righteousness is painfully obvious and reprehensible.

Particularly as noted in the quote below.



It is your self (and your kind) that wants them dead.

We are the ones sending our military onto the other side of the planet to kill and murder them.

:coffee:You really are stupid.

I do believe that the point is that your hypocrisy and self-righteousness is painfully obvious and reprehensible.

Particularly as noted in the quote below.



It is your self (and your kind) that wants them dead.

We are the ones sending our military onto the other side of the planet to kill and murder them.

:coffee:

I agree, we are sending our troops to the other side of the world to kill the "bad guys." However, we aim to leave the civilians alone.

Are you trying to tell us they do not send their people over here to kill innocent civilians??? How many military people were in the twin towers on 9/11? For that matter, how many military people were on the planes they hijacked?

It was mentioned the last time you ran for public office, and I will throw it out there again...if you love the place, the religion and the people so much - not to mention the traditions - why not move there permanently? I think I know the answer though...no public internet in the public libraries!!!

I do believe that the point is that your hypocrisy and self-righteousness is painfully obvious and reprehensible.

Particularly as noted in the quote below.



It is your self (and your kind) that wants them dead.

We are the ones sending our military onto the other side of the planet to kill and murder them.

:coffee:

Yup... take the battle to their soil not ours. Damn good policy to having bombs dropping in your backyard.

Yes, JPC... I want them dead; Radical Islam. Kill them all before they kill us. That's how war goes. I know you don't get that and I know I am wasting my time with you; but what the heck.

:lalala:

Yup... take the battle to their soil not ours. Damn good policy to having bombs dropping in your backyard.

Yes, JPC... I want them dead; Radical Islam. Kill them all before they kill us. That's how war goes. I know you don't get that and I know I am wasting my time with you; but what the heck.


I do get that message that you have murder and bigotry in your heart, mind, soul and in your religion.

That is the point of your hypocrisy and self righteousness being so obviously non-Christ-like, and reprehensible.

It is NOT that they want to kill you as it has always been your-kind that wants to murder other people to promote your own ideology and to claim your superiority - while they fight back in their own self defense.


:war:

I do get that message that you have murder and bigotry in your heart, mind, soul and in your religion.

That is the point of your hypocrisy and self righteousness being so obviously non-Christ-like, and reprehensible.

It is NOT that they want to kill you as it has always been your-kind that wants to murder other people to promote your own ideology and to claim your superiority - while they fight back in their own self defense.

It would seem you are attempting to make a which came first; the chicken or the egg? type argument. Another, who through the first punch?

...."non-Christ-like"....I have reason to believe that you know what "Christ-like" is.

There is LOTS of bigotry, malice, murder, etc...in, and in the name of, religion. But, it would seem you equate religion to faith and faith to religion. I don't know why.

It would seem you are attempting to make a which came first; the chicken or the egg? type argument. Another, who through the first punch?


That seems to be true, but there really are sensible places and events in history which are credible points to start from.

As like the first World War (1914-1918) is the point where the ongoing today conflicts truly began.

Before that war the Holy Lands including Jerusalem were living peacefully under Muslim rule (the Ottoman Empire) for hundreds of years until the Caucasian Countries made World War and then the British Empire "liberated" Jerusalem and the Holy Lands from the Muslims even though they did not need to be so liberated at all.

Then the British gave the land of Palestine over to massive Jewish immigration which thereafter there has never been any peace.

We could go back in history to where the white Christian Countries declared holy war against the Muslims under the Christian Crusades but that is going too far back in time, IMO.

So we do know who gave the "first punch" as it was done in the first World War.



...."non-Christ-like"....I have reason to believe that you know what "Christ-like" is.


I do have a more realistic knowledge of the Bible, so I do know rather well as to what can be said as "Christ like", but some people dispute such things so I feel it is entirely safe to declare this one thing that the brutal hostilities and murders of Muslims to defend American fears is NOT Christ like.



There is LOTS of bigotry, malice, murder, etc...in, and in the name of, religion. But, it would seem you equate religion to faith and faith to religion. I don't know why.


The faith in religion is the highest order.

There are faiths in gov, faith in the military, faith in people, faith in one self, and many kinds of faith and I like these faiths of all kind, but one needs an accurate faith in God foremost as the key to all others.

:coffee: