Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
like i said, you obviously hate the constitution and the religious freedom it provides. I'm not surprised considering you are a big governement 'conservative in name only'....
pretty sure you lose MOST of your rights
- Thread starter GURPS
- Start date
like i said, you obviously hate the constitution and the religious freedom it provides. I'm not surprised considering you are a big governement 'conservative in name only'....
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
You can believe that Islam is a religion if you like .
Lots of people are fooled by it.
You can even believe Al Sharpton is a real preacher.
Lots of people are fooled by him too.
LibertyBeacon
Unto dust we shall return
I'll take that as an admission you have no clue what you are talking about, a fact which has been noted before. Several times.
Love you, sweet cheeks!
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
you can beleive that your opinion matters, but it doesn't. The constitution protects all religions, even the ones you dont like. Thats actually the point.....
.....question.......was she wearing her hijab in her drivers license photo? I think all photo ID's require you to show full facial, and have head coverings at least showing the hairline. If she removed it to GET a license, where her face is visible to any man....seems to be a religious convenience to not want to remove it in front of men when she got busted....just my $.02.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Based on photos of the OP article and other photos on the web her hijab is not a full face cover hijab, but it still covered her head where a weapon could be hidden.
Last edited:
itsrequired
New Member
A weapon could be hidden in her bra too but they don't make her remove that in front of men do they?
itsrequired
New Member
Can you define what a religion is? I have more than a couple of Muslim friends who I'd say are very religious people. I would also say in part, due to their religion, they are very moral, law abiding good people who continuously work to make our community better.
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
Good for you. Enjoy them. You make your own definition of a religion. One that says in their chief article of faith is that they will kill or enslave anyone who is an infidel or does not belong to their cult is not a religion to me.
itsrequired
New Member
Where are you getting your information? I know my faith is based on the bible. I know thier faith is based on the Koran. Can you tell me where in the Koran it states what you just said or are you just talking out of your ass without any factual information to back that up?
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
What rock have you been sleeping under?
http://www.wvinter.net/~haught/Koran.html
“Slay the idolators [non-Muslims] wherever ye find them, and take them captive, and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the last Day…. Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! (Sura 9:5,29,41).
http://www.jamesrussellpublishing.biz/whatyouneedtoknowaboutmuslims.html
You ever hear of Google? Type in "Koran says kill or enslave infidels." you get 150 thousand hits.
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
For once I have to praise Michelle Obama.
On Saudi TV they blocked out her head. (I suppose because they couldn't cut it off.)
Good job Michelle, I bet Obama was pissed, that she refused to wear a scarf.
Tilted
..
That may well be what early adherents of a particular faith (I'm not sure if they called themselves Muslims then, but that's the term commonly used today - at any rate, I'm referring to followers of Muhammad, the people that followed his teachings) believed. For identification purposes, today we might call them traditional Muslims or originalist Muslims or fundamentalist Muslims - something to identify them as adherents to an early version of that religion, ones who still hold to the idea you refer to. There are (apparently) still some people who follow or practice that version of Islam, perhaps even a meaningful number that do.
But that's not what Islam is today - that's not the typical version of it, that's not the predominate belief that goes by that name now. The vast majority of people who identify as Muslim today do not adhere to that belief, they do not hold all the same views as were held by Muslims in the beginning and at earlier times. (If you want to ask how I know this, fell free.) And that's their prerogative. People can have whatever religious beliefs they want, they can modify other religious beliefs and adopt the modified version as their own - they aren't bound by what others believed. And they can use a general name (like Islam) if they want.
A similar thing is true of Chritianity today. The vast majority of people that identify as Christian do not take literally everything that is said in the Bible. They don't hold as rigidly to some of the concepts that earlier Chritians did, they don't follow all the same practices or espouse all the same ideas. In a way, there are newer versions of ?Christianity - they just use the same general name. And, similarly, they may well still be what we might call fundamentalist Christians - those that do hold rigidly to what the Bible says in every regard and espouse all the same ideas as earlier Christians. But they don't represent the majority of identifying Christians today, and they don't own the name Christian. A given Christian believes what they choose to believe. A given Muslim believes what they choose to believe.
So... anyway... there are s lot of identifying Muslims in the world. Most of them aren't what we might call fundamentalist Muslims. They are something meaningful different in that they don't advance the traditional Islamic notion you refer to. They practice a religion, just as Christians do - just as Budhists and Hindus and Jews and Waashats (?) do. Yes, the nature of respective religions may be very different from that of others. But that's the point of religious freedom, you don't get to decide whether their beliefs are valid. You don't get to precisely outline the contours of what something must be in order for it to be a religion. Islam is, for the purposes of the American notion of religous freedom, a religion - at least to the extent that adherents assert it as such. It may be other things as well - all kinds of descriptors and classifications may be applicable. But it is a religion, even Founders recognized it as such.
And just to be clear - even though I took the time to distinguish the more prominent versions of Islam from the less prominent versions that hold to the belief that you refer to - those less prominent versions are religions as well. Human history is replete with belief systems that taught absurd things, many of them are still regarded as religions - religiosity doesn't hinge on the reasonableness of beliefs or even the absence of the advocation of violence.
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
Your post has some good points, but despite those points the wording of their Koran has not changed. Many of the fundamentalists as you call them feel that those who do not live by the old tenets are Apostates, and in some places the Muslims kill those others calling themselves Muslims for being Apostates.
Some may not hold with the killing but most of those are being very quiet and it leaves one to wonder if they are practicing Taquiya.
In other words are they quiet as a ruse until they become numerous enough to become "fundamentalists".
You are correct that most Christians do not practice a lot of what they preach.
I am sure many Muslims do not, but I look at some pictures of Iran and Afghanistan in the 50's and see women in dresses and going to colleges, and a look today see's these women in Burka's. Are they regressing? Is Islam returning to it's former fundamentalist roots?
Are the people coming here fleeing that? If so why do they come here and hide in those "fundamentalist"clothes.
To me any Muslim woman who hides herself in a Burka is a "fundamentalist as you call them.
The woman who is suing a police department for taking her picture without her veil, what is she?
In other words, if they do not believe in what their book says about killing why do they believe they need to hide themselves in those clothes?
If there were a way to separate the wheat from the chaff I would agree with you that some believe as their book says and others do not.
Unfortunately we have no way of knowing ------------------If it looks like a Duck and Quacks like a Duck, ---------
PsyOps
Pixelated
Not much different than what Christians felt they needed to do back during the Crusades or the Salem witch trials. Do you honestly believe this is a disqualifier for being a religion? The bible is full of this sort of thing – God telling Israel to exterminate an entire people: the Canaanites.
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
not to mention all of those OT stonings, eye for an eye, and blood atonements....
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
Yes, there were atrocities that were committed in the past, By Christians, by Romans, by a lot of people.
Every war has it's atrocities, and the winners set up criminal courts while their own atrocities go unpunished.
It's an old argument, and it has some merit.
I see a growing political movement posing as a religion which wishes to control the world.
They don't hide this fact. In fact they brag on it. It is growing. No informed person can deny that.
Pretty soon they will have Nuclear weapons, they are building a ICBM that can reach America.
Now if you wish to ignore the fact that this cult is growing, that they pose no danger to others, that things are just fine, I don't want to change your mind.
You just call them a religion and say they have every right to move in and take over, and encourage Sharia law.
I call them a cult---------no different than the Thuggee's of India.