Muslims... Come Join this thread!

Islam is a religion of slavery. In Islam, women are chattel. The hijab is a symbol of ownership. Islam means submission. Christianity has its issues too but at least you can BS your way out of them.

 

I think you have schizophrenia to be quite honest. The fact that I employ people means I'm a Republican? I'm not even american dude, and I'm a liberal, small "L", that's why I oppose Islam. I'm not badmouthing "an entire people", I'm criticizing the ideology of Islam. Islam is fundamentally incompatible with western civilization. Hell, it's not compatible with most of Eastern civilization either. The values of Islam are wholly antithetical to a peaceful, prosperous, free society.

Islam is not a race. All my sources of translations are muslim sources. Read my posts; I'm posting from Sunnah.com . You can open any Quran and Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, the two core hadiths of Sunni Islam (90% of muslims subscribe to this ideology) and find these verses.

You know a muslim hater when you see one? Then why would I employ muslims, and be friends with them? Why would I think Sufism is mostly beautiful? Why would I adore the Qawwal of Nusrat Ali Fateh Khan?

The fact is that I wish good will upon all of humanity, whether muslim or not, and you should take a reality pill, and realize that the largest victim of Islam's violence are muslims themselves. You insult muslims when you lower your standards of behavior and thought for them in order to accomodate an ideology which should be erased from the planet.

The country of Spain translates more works of literature into Spanish every year than the entire muslim world has translated since the time of the Prophet. This is a problem for me, and if you think that it's bigoted to say that, because it might be offensive to muslims, then you my friend are the racist.

 

There's a burgeoning movement of agnostic Muslims, who don't accept the whole Qu'ran. Not sure if it stands a chance...

 

Unfortunately that makes them hypocrites (a technical term in Islam) at best, or apostates at worst, both theological crimes which carry the death penalty. Muhammad himself told his followers to murder people who didn't believe his teachings, in his lifetime. When some people took the initiative and murdered people without first asking the prophet, he forgave them and said they did the right thing.

There's also a movement called Quranism, where the Quran is seen as the only holy text in Islam and the Hadith and Sira are not employed, which doesn't really help civilization but it's marginally better. The quran on its own actually doesn't make much sense at all without the life of Muhammad and it contains enough violent passages to not make the situation much better.

 

This thread and current politics in a nutshell.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_GYLxe3Vuk

 

Asmo... I'm a Muslim.

 

Anyone who posts that video like you have done has an agenda for badmouthing Muslims. Your line of thinking is exactly like Hannity and Levin...all anti-Muslim...all day long. It seems to me this thread is an invitation to trap Muslims into defamation...exactly what you have done. You say you have Muslims friends and employ them; but, I say that is not true. For it is obvious, you are a hater of Muslims. I came to this thread for a discussion, not to listen to racism from Muslim haters. I did not come here to defend the Muslims, as I am not one of them, and do not agree with most of their governments. But, I will defend anyone who becomes a victim or a set-up victim of haters like you.

 

I find your position puzzling.. You seem to say that the best way to figure out what a religion is all about is to ignore what the average adherent believes and to focus instead on books you think most of them don't read or understand. The Qur'an and ahadith are, as you say "more complex and convoluted than Christianity" (which is complex and convoluted enough), which provides flexibility to adapt to changing conditions. I'm sure that you're aware that Shia Muslims don't accept the Sunnah, a source of hadith that Sunnis consider canonical. And that there are four major schools of Sharia, with differing interpretations.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wajahat-ali/understanding-sharia-law-_b_844624.html On another thread, you said that " Muslims don't create Islam, Islam creates Muslims." I thought at the time it was an odd statement, but I let it go. But it seems to be a basic element of your approach to understanding Islam. Since you're an atheist, who do you think created Islam? If it wasn't Allah, it must have been Muslims. You purport to be engaged in "objective, academic study", as does Bill Warner, whom you seem to admire. (For the benefit of others on this thread, I'm referring to another thread Are The Major Religions More Different From Another Than Alike ,Post #14), where Bill Warner's video is posted But it should be evident to any objective observer that you and Bill suffer from a strong anti-Islamic bias that colors your judgment and makes "objective academic study" of this subject impossible for you. Indeed the very notion of understanding social reality by ignoring the historical and social context and focusing on texts is naive, if not absurd. Some of your best friends (or employees) may be Muslim. That's great. But I think an objective observer would still find your "objectivity" questionable.

I don't know about you, but Bill is a physicist with no academic background at all in the social sciences, religious studies, or history. Muslims believe that the Qur'an was communicated to Muhammad in Arabic, and some theologians think it can only really be appreciated in that language. Yet Bill doesn't speak Arabic! Think about that. He's written books on the Qur'an and the other sacred writings without speaking Arabic! Would a scholar have any credibility if he wrote about the writings of Rousseau and Victor Hugo without speaking Arabic, or pontificated about the true meaning of the Bible without speaking koine Greek ? Bill may think that his credentials as a "hard scientist" enable him to achieve what those fuzzy minded social scientists and historians are unable to grasp. Like any "hard scientist" he likes things tangible: people are too complicated, just show me the texts! That may seem rational to you, but to me it's incredibly arrogant, obtuse, and frankly nutty.

As for the video you've given us this time, who is this guy? He sounds like a Christian apologist, which I find ironic, given your atheism. I wonder how he analyzes Christian scripture. I shudder to think! The approach which he Bill, ISIS and you are taking is, by definition, fundamentalist--a literal interpretation of scripture wrenched from social and historical context.

Others have said it, but let me reiterate that ISIS is a perversion of Islam. In fact, it's a perversion of a perversion--for Sunnis, a reductio ad absurdum of bin Laden's version of Wahabi/Salafi thinking. Radical Islam was a response to perceived evils of westernization. Intellectuals like Qutb decided it was permissible to cross the line and kill fellow Muslims and innocent civilians to combat the menace. To combat these tendencies effectively, we need the aid of real Muslims, and I seriously doubt that that will happen if we brand them all as inherently our enemies. There are passages in Islamic sacred texts, as there are in Judeo-Christian texts, that can be taken out of context and used to stir up mobs. I'm sure you know, for example, that Saint Paul speaks of slavery in ways that seem to be accepting of the practice. The most effective way to deal with these, in my opinion, is to consider the historical context and the overall message."Assalamu alaikum"

 

That video you posted depicting the beheading puts you, in my opinion, beyond the pale of rational discussion. If you think it's "objective scholarly analysis", you're obviously living in an alternative universe. It would be like showing a KKK lynching of an African-American and saying "See what Christianity is all about!" Or maybe a more appropriate analogy would be to show a documentary about Pol Pot's killing fields and saying "Look what those nasty atheists do to people.

 

We are secular Muslims, and secular persons of Muslim societies. We are believers, doubters, and unbelievers, brought together by a great struggle, not between the West and Islam, but between the free and the unfree.
We affirm the inviolable freedom of the individual conscience. We believe in the equality of all human persons.
We insist upon the separation of religion from state and the observance of universal human rights.
We find traditions of liberty, rationality, and tolerance in the rich histories of pre-Islamic and Islamic societies. These values do not belong to the West or the East; they are the common moral heritage of humankind.
We see no colonialism, racism, or so-called “Islamaphobia” in submitting Islamic practices to criticism or condemnation when they violate human reason or rights.
We call on the governments of the world to
reject Sharia law, fatwa courts, clerical rule, and state-sanctioned religion in all their forms; oppose all penalties for blasphemy and apostasy, in accordance with Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human rights;
eliminate practices, such as female circumcision, honor killing, forced veiling, and forced marriage, that further the oppression of women;
protect sexual and gender minorities from persecution and violence;
reform sectarian education that teaches intolerance and bigotry towards non-Muslims; and foster an open public sphere in which all matters may be discussed without coercion or intimidation.
We demand the release of Islam from its captivity to the totalitarian ambitions of power-hungry men and the rigid structures of orthodoxy.
We enjoin academics and thinkers everywhere to embark on a fearless examination of the origins and sources of Islam, and to promulgate the ideals of free scientific and spiritual inquiry through cross-cultural translation, publishing, and the mass media.
We say to Muslim believers: there is a noble future for Islam as a personal faith, not a political doctrine; to Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Baha’is, and all members of non-Muslim faith communities: we stand with you as free and equal citizens; and to nonbelievers: we defend your unqualified liberty to question and dissent.
Before any of us is a member of the Umma, the Body of Christ, or the Chosen People, we are all members of the community of conscience, the people who must choose for themselves.

 

While I really like that text orison, I have to guffaw at the term "secular muslim", which is an oxymoron. To be a muslim means to say the Shahada; a statement which contains within it the phrase "I bear witness that there is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is his messenger".

I don't know what it means to be a "secular muslim" anymore than what it means to be a "secular christian"; "secular jew" is a different term because "jew" refers to an ethnic group, while "muslim" does not, it refers to someone who practices an ideology. I can't become a jew tomorrow, but I could become a muslim very easily.

 

Hey Okiefreak, if Bill Warner doesn't have the right credentials to discuss Islam, maybe we should go to someone who does.



Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS. Born to a family of Islamic preachers, he has an undergraduate, Master's and PhD in Islamic Theology from the University of Bhagdad.

I wonder if ISIS has anything to do with Islam? What does it mean when to justify their actions, ISIS merely points to passages in the Quran and Hadiths, but to justify the beliefs of "moderate islam", "moderate muslims" have to find ways to ignore or radically reinterpret the holy, immutable, perfect texts that they apparently follow?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16Egi2V4lgg

This isn't the equivalent of the Westboro Baptist Church; this is the equivalent of Roman Catholicism.

Saudi Arabia is the Rome of Islam.

Nope, no problems here. Islam can't be part of the problem of Islamic terrorism.

 

Slavery has been condoned in Islam and allowed in shariat law. Children of slaves or non-Muslim prisoners of war could become slaves, never a freeborn Muslim.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_views_on_slavery

The influence of secular institutions probably lead to the ending of slavery in the middle east as well, at least those in Saudi Arabia and other recognized Islamic states.

 

We're doomed. It's gonna be 1,000 years of darkness. I place the blame squarely on liberalism and cultural relativism.

 

Yeah, and ex-KKK leader David Duke also has a Ph.D. in history from the (virulently anti-Semitic Interregional Academy of Personnel Management in the Ukraine, where he actually taught history and international relations. I guess he should qualify as an expert on Zionism (the subject of his dissertation) and Christianity (since the KKK claims membership in that religion). Your propaganda is getting more blatant. Al Baghdadi ranks with Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot as one of the most evil leaders of the past hundred years, and unlike the others, he's still alive.Whatever education he received in Baghdad was put to use figuring out how to pervert Islam to advance his psychopathic agenda. Things didn't turn out too well for the other three, and let's hope Baghdadi goes the way of Bin Laden. ISIS is to Islam as Hitler and Duke were to Christianity and Pol Pot was to atheism--a power-mad monster who seeks to manipulate the symbols and doctrines of the religion to spread hate and pursue his own political advancement. "What does it mean when to justify their actions, ISIS merely points to passages in the Quran and Hadiths?" It means that the Devil can quote scripture! It's worth mentioning that Isis and al-Baghdadi have been excommunicated from Islam by a fatwa that has been unanimously approved by moderate Muslims. But Baghdadi's dissertation director thinks that was unfair, because “While you can question whether they are humans or not, there is no doubt that the Isis, including Abu Bakr, are indeed bona fide Muslims.” in a manner of speaking.

For a Muslim view of al-Baghdadi as an imposter, see the following article in Al Jazeera http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/07/baghdadi-impostor-20147991513785260.html

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAAq2EQLBkY

Be honest Muslims of HF, is Sharia the end game or not?

 

Well, I hate to spit some more cultural relativism at you, but..

I'm reading a book right now that takes place during the Civil War , and it has me thinking..

The Civil War started and ended in the 1860s. The Civil Rights movement culminated in the 1960s, exactly 100 years later.

Not a lot of time to move between thinking "ignorant darkies" are too stupid to ever be free, to the majority of people believing we should all be equal.

So hopefully your thought that it will take 1000 years for the Middle East to catch up will prove to be pure hyperbole.

 

Hi

 

As-Salamu Alaykum, sister