Islamophobia vs Islamofascism

desiredbard

Leinster should fly flag of Islam
The flag of Islam should be flown over Leinster House, an islamic extremist said last night. Speaking in Dublin, Anjem Choudray said: 'As a Muslim, I believe Islam is superior to every other way of life and that it can resolve all the social and economic problems that Ireland suffers from. As a symbol of that, the flag of Islam should be flown over the Dáil (NL=Parlement).'

The Brittish born Lawyer addedadded: 'This is symbolic of the fact that all societies will be run betteraccording to Gods Law.

lawyer WTF ... In Holland they are always complaining that they do not have any socio-economic chances. This is absolute proof that Muslim extremism is underestimated big time in Europe.

It is now wait and see what is going to happen with Aishah Amzi who wants to take her right to indoctrinate little children with her human right to impose extremists on little children.

I would almost suggest that if you have the theory on Molested Children have without psychiatric help a, huge chance to become molesters themselves.

The western way of living which is so despised by them our judicial system and freedom of speach however is continiously (ab)used, and left wing solicitors are jumping to the aid of every minority.

As proven in the case of Faizel Enait, the Dutch muslim who went for an interview as a cival servant, (customer manager at a social welfare office) and who was turned down because of the fact that he would refuse to shake the hand of women out of religious conviction.

Of course this has been taken to the equality commision and the advice is that the applicant was turned down on incorrect grounds.

What incorrect grounds, the guy wants a job in a customer facing role, let him embrace our social values as well as he does our right to free speech and wasting taxpayers mony on imbecile courtcases.

As long as these cases make the headline all through europe, I am utterly convinced we have more to fear of islamofascism than of islamophobia.

Wibbs

While I do see your point the problem is that it's the extremist nutters who get the most column inches. I mean if a Irish Muslim bloke had said "would you get away out that, Irish flag replaced? Sure that's only mad now(Tipperary Muslim obviously ) what would be written about that? Nada.

Now the eejits do exist and are likely to get more powerful if we all don't listen to the moderate voices or accuse them of the same loopyness. It's like the whole veil issue. Most Muslim women don't wear the whole head to toe get up, just the head scarf, yet the perception is they do thus tarring them all with the same brush. Nutters on both sides jump on stuff like this.

Hobbes

Not the forum for these kinds of posts. Moved to Humanities. Please read both charters. Thanks.

desiredbard

Hobbes wrote:

Not the forum for these kinds of posts. Moved to Humanities. Please read both charters. Thanks.

A religious statement does not belong in a subforum covering topics regarding this same religion?
Would that be because of the fact that it is criticising this "all problem solving" religion?

(Resolving by: public executions, decapitation, head-taxes , oppression of women, indoctrination, character assassination)

Why cant this discussion not be raised in the subforum it is applicable to?

Zombrex

desiredbard wrote:

It is now wait and see what is going to happen with Aishah Amzi who wants to take her right to indoctrinate little children with her human right to impose extremists on little children.

I don't recall Amzi wishing to impose anything on children, little or otherwise, beyond the standard teaching ciriculum.

Do you have a link where she says she wished to teach fundamentalists Islam to children?

Talliesin

desiredbard wrote:

A religious statement does not belong in a subforum covering topics regarding this same religion?

Yes it does, please come back when you have a religious statement.

desiredbard wrote:

Why cant this discussion not be raised in the subforum it is applicable to?

It can. That's why it was moved here. Though that question was really one for feedback. Do try to read charters please.

The incident though is pretty much "nutter says his lot should run everything".

Pretty much the only religions where that hasn't happened are those who isolate themselves from the rest of society like the Shakers and the Amish, because they're ignoring how society outside is run they clearly don't want to take control of it.

Beyond that, I've encountered plenty of people from all sorts of faiths with this view. The most common in this country being Roman Catholics simply because there are more Roman Catholics than people of other religions and hence more Roman Catholic nutters just as a matter of the law of averages. They've even set up political parties a few times. However there are certainly nutters from other Christian denominations, nutter Pagans, nutter Jews, nutter Atheists (they're funny, they're always convinced they're being so rational), and so on.

desiredbard

edit

desiredbard

Wicknight wrote:

I don't recall Amzi wishing to impose anything on children, little or otherwise, beyond the standard teaching ciriculum.

Do you have a link where she says she wished to teach fundamentalists Islam to children?

I did not say she said but by her actions she does.
Showing up in a burka, refusing to shake hands with men teaches or should i say does not teacht western values to (western)kids living in a western society.

She did state that her pupils could see in her pupils what she ment..... Ever watched the looks a western woman whos is modernly dressed gets from these type of people? So I can imagine the lessons girls learn from her.

Why could this woman show up normally dressed for the interview and shake hands with the director before?

Wibbs wrote:

While I do see your point the problem is that it's the extremist nutters who get the most column inches. I mean if a Irish Muslim bloke had said "would you get away out that, Irish flag replaced? Sure that's only mad now(Tipperary Muslim obviously ) what would be written about that? Nada.

Now the eejits do exist and are likely to get more powerful if we all don't listen to the moderate voices or accuse them of the same loopyness. It's like the whole veil issue. Most Muslim women don't wear the whole head to toe get up, just the head scarf, yet the perception is they do thus tarring them all with the same brush. Nutters on both sides jump on stuff like this.

Since I personally feel Muslims like to hide themselves in their own little subculture, I thought posting this thread in their subforum would actually benefit discussion, insight and maybe even understanding

Well what would happen if some RC fanatic would plead the return of the spanish inquisition and the papal flag on top of the Dáil (and Ian Paisley spiked on the pole next to it...i know the latter is tempting) .... we all would say the man or woman is mad. Within Europe its seems one can not criticise the Islam, but it is open season on catholicism and christianity.
Sharia mortgages (no Torah mortgages although jews look the same way at loans). BA stewardesses can wear a Hijab but not a crucifix.

If I would repeat the question I posted back in the ISLAM subforum here,
Lets see what happens:

IF the republic of Ireland / Western Europe would move towards or embrace canon law and spanish inquisition would you.

A) Resist this physically
Resist this by debate
C) Do Nothing / emigrate
D) Kind of Support this, (not oppose it) since it is declared by st Peters infallable replavcement on earth and not doing so will make you a heretic.
E) Fully support this and aid th implementation because its the will of Jesus

(and like I asked on the islam thread....keep your sarcasme to yourself....
Muslims here kindly answer this thread

Wibbs

I'd have to say A agus B TBH. I would feel very strongly that we've come too far for that guff of any rigid faith to crank up again.

Now I know were this is going, but how likely is it that Sharia law is going to take over here anytime soon? For a start the numbers aren't there and there exist many Muslims who would be against such a move(many left such a system precisely because of that). How they would stand up against it is another harder issue. It's hard to fight the nutters in any society especially if they use the threat of violence. A cursory glance at the "troubles" on our own fair island will back that up.

Now there does exist a growing islamisation of many parts of the world. This has many factors, not least of which majority numbers in such countries. Economics and geopolitics come into it too. The disinherited, percieved or otherwise tend more to some sort of fervour in the hope of a better life. Many of the ghettos(loose term) in places like Britain, France and Holland have similar reasons to energise the cause. We all need to be sitting down with the moderates and talking with them. Otherwise, we may well be forced to deal with the nutjobs as it's becoming obvious that they are the ones that garner the most attention. People see that power and ally themselves to them because of that(and other reasons). Hard one though.

bonkey

desiredbard wrote:

This is absolute proof that Muslim extremism is underestimated big time in Europe.

How?

This is an article showing that there is at least one person amongst teh 600-odd million in Europe who holds a relatively extreme view on Islam's "rightful" place, but who has otherwise expressed no desire to corrupt or fight the system.

In short, its someone telling us the world would be a better place if it was different. boards.ie is full of such characters, but you don't see anyone holding that up as proof positive that Socialist extremism, communist extremism, tree-hugging-hippy-crap extremism, or whatever is underestimaged big time in Europe.

I have two theories as to why you don't :

1) Its not trendy to demonise socialists / communists / tree-hugging-hippies etc. at the moment.
2) It would be an illogical argument to begin with.

As long as these cases make the headline all through europe, I am utterly convinced we have more to fear of islamofascism than of islamophobia.

This would be because making a big deal of isolated incidents is proof of how big the problem is, rather than how making a big deal out of isolated incidents tends to people acting as though they're a big deal?

I'm just amazed at how all these other problems that were facing our country over the past couple of decades all got solved despite them being the same type of menace seem to see here and no-one really tackling them.

Its almost as though they ceased to be problems once the press stopped telling us how problematic they were.

desiredbard

bonkey wrote:

How?

By no Western Muslim so far making a clear cut statement against these opinion in a way that does not leave the option misinterpretation open.

As stated above by ..., "not any time soon here" is really the stance that worries me. Sharia mortgages are already available, and as stated a Jihab is religious freedom, a crucifix provocation. Its not near paying head-taxes but not far enough from it either.
Muslims applauding during the movie World Trade Center, not afterwards because its a good film, but during the moments the planes strike.
And what is here, Ireland, the Brittish isles (according to the atlas), Western Europe, Western civilisation?

Now is the time for discussion and debate.
If I would state that celibacy for catholic priests is ridiculous...nothing the matter.
Now state that you think a Jihab, or a burka, or multiple wives or marrying your cousin is not sound...and you your very close to a personal fatwa against yourself.

Bring on the debate, lets agree to disagree, but for <sounds like SEE in irish>
sake defend your position and be able to criticize yourself instead of being able to quote from what some not so clean character wrote around 600ad.

So far Muslims belong with their ability to discuss their faith in the same group as Jehova's witneses, in my opinion that is


This is an article showing that there is at least one person amongst teh 600-odd million in Europe who holds a relatively extreme view on Islam's "rightful" place, but who has otherwise expressed no desire to corrupt or fight the system.

In short, its someone telling us the world would be a better place if it was different. boards.ie is full of such characters, but you don't see anyone holding that up as proof positive that Socialist extremism, communist extremism, tree-hugging-hippy-crap extremism, or whatever is underestimaged big time in Europe.

I have two theories as to why you don't :

1) Its not trendy to demonise socialists / communists / tree-hugging-hippies etc. at the moment.
2) It would be an illogical argument to begin with.


This would be because making a big deal of isolated incidents is proof of how big the problem is, rather than how making a big deal out of isolated incidents tends to people acting as though they're a big deal?

I'm just amazed at how all these other problems that were facing our country over the past couple of decades all got solved despite them being the same type of menace seem to see here and no-one really tackling them.

Its almost as though they ceased to be problems once the press stopped telling us how problematic they were.[/QUOTE]

Talliesin

desiredbard wrote:

Well what would happen if some RC fanatic would plead the return of the spanish inquisition and the papal flag on top of the Dáil

You mean like happens every day?

There's plenty of such lunatics around. We mostly ignore them.

desiredbard wrote:

Within Europe its seems one can not criticise the Islam, but it is open season on catholicism and christianity.

Quite the opposite. Christian lunatics come out with lunacy and we (including those of us that are Christian) ignore them. A Muslim lunatic comes out with lunacy and it gets print and broadcast media coverage and dozens of little fools running around in a Green Peril panic.

desiredbard

Talliesin wrote:

You mean like happens every day?

There's plenty of such lunatics around. We mostly ignore them.


Quite the opposite. Christian lunatics come out with lunacy and we (including those of us that are Christian) ignore them. A Muslim lunatic comes out with lunacy and it gets print and broadcast media coverage and dozens of little fools running around in a Green Peril panic.

Untill you can give me some exsamples of that I kindly considder that bull****

Schuhart

desiredbard wrote:

Now state that you think a Jihab, or a burka, or multiple wives or marrying your cousin is not sound...and you your very close to a personal fatwa against yourself.

I don't know, this guy has been trying hard to be subjected to a fatwa, without success.

I think there is a legitimate debate to be had about areas where there would be conflict between Islamic doctrine and the liberties we take as part of the furniture. There is also a legitimate debate about where an amount of Islamic thinking falls into 'Penny Catechism' simplisticness. But, in fairness, this is not altogether different to the long road we've travelled with Catholicism. It's just a bit disheartening to get to the end of that road and have to start again with a new group of people with a similar mindset.

desiredbard wrote:

Untill you can give me some exsamples of that I kindly considder that bull****

Is this good enough?

Maria Duce ("Mary, lead [us]") was a small right-wing Roman Catholic group in Ireland founded in 1942 by Fr Denis Fahey C.S.Sp. Its principal aim was to have the kingship of Jesus Christ over the island of Ireland recognised in law. In the group's view, this implied the withdrawal of legal recognition from--though not necessarily the prohibition of the practice of--all religions other than Roman Catholicism. Though Maria Duce's membership probably did not much exceed one hundred, its monthly journal Fiat enjoyed a fairly wide circulation in the late 1940s and early 1950s. The movement was not encouraged by the Irish hierarchy, whose members viewed its extremism with suspicion and desired not to become associated with Fr Fahey's long record of anti-Semitic writings and public statements. It was ordered to disband in 1955, a year after its founder's death, by the Archbishop of Dublin, John Charles McQuaid--himself a former pupil of Fahey's and a fellow member of the Holy Ghost Fathers.

babyvaio

desiredbard wrote:

<<to cut your long story short>>

desiredbard, what's your problem BTW? you got scared that God's True Law might become The Law here in Ireland?

And now let me tell you something extra. I've seen your initial post and the moderators in that particular subforum should be ashamed of themselves because they let you write what you wrote. And what you wrote is full of hatred and hostility and even evil, but most of all - a complete ignorance. I honestly don't care where are you coming from and where are you going to, but I will advise you of a few things.

Sharia Law is God's Law. The very same and only God who created all this and created you as well, just so that you know. It's your business if you believe in Him or not, but you should know something. If Sharia Law was also the country law in these so-called highly developed western countries, then their morality would go sky-high, cos most of these moral (read: immoral) western values which so many people believe in nowadays would vanish into void:

- homosexuality
- drug traffic & addiction
- child abuse
- family violence
- adultery
- alcohol addiction & related problems
- unjust usury a.k.a. rip-off interest rates
- general immorality
- hipocrisy
- murder
- robbery
- inequality between sexes (yes, you got that right, i.e. women probably have less rights in west than in the Islamic countries)
- pornography
- paedophilia
- sexual harassment
- etc.

The list is much longer and goes on and on. Now about your so-called freedom of speech. You still cannot say what you want in the west without consequences. There are rules. You don't live in a jungle so you can scream like you know who and nobody says a word. If you think freedom of speech is absolute, then go and try to publish something nasty about someone who has a so-called high position in society or power to stop you and you'll see what happens. Or try and go to opera and start screaming like you know who and wait to see what happens. They'll kick you out in a second at least. Just like that. See, immoral freedom of speech is not welcome anywhere and probably this is what you meant. Bottom line - you cannot say what you want where you want it just like that - you still have to obey certain rules of society.

So I don't know what your problem really is, but ignorance is at the top of the list with your problems. And I tried to be the nicest guy here, so no offense ha?

Bottle_of_Smoke

babyvaio wrote:

Sharia Law is God's Law. The very same and only God who created all this and created you as well, just so that you know. It's your business if you believe in Him or not, but you should know something. If Sharia Law was also the country law in these so-called highly developed western countries, then their morality would go sky-high, cos most of these moral (read: immoral) western values which so many people believe in nowadays would vanish into void:

- homosexuality stop being a fool, if it wasn't natural then why does it happen?
- drug traffic & addiction some drugs are great
- child abuse If you think Islam stops people from being mentally ill you're an ignorant fool
- family violence or just more one sided?
- adultery true, dont think I'd be bothered with adultury if I had seven wives to choose from
- alcohol addiction & related problems you win this round
- unjust usury a.k.a. rip-off interest rates no ones forcing you to take out loans - and Sharia finance seems like a loophole orgy to me
- general immorality how about general vagueness?
- hipocrisy sorry - human trait
- murder any statistics here?
- robbery No robbery whatsoever in Iran?
- inequality between sexes (yes, you got that right, i.e. women probably have less rights in west than in the Islamic countries) do elaborate
- pornography don't see the problem here
- paedophilia see my child abuse entry
- sexual harassment I'm sure it would be reduced, but sexual harrassment is something almost anyone can deal with/address
- etc.

The list is much longer and goes on and on. Now about your so-called freedom of speech. You still cannot say what you want in the west without consequences. There are rules. You don't live in a jungle so you can scream like you know who and nobody says a word. If you think freedom of speech is absolute, then go and try to publish something nasty about someone who has a so-called high position in society or power to stop you and you'll see what happens. Or try and go to opera and start screaming like you know who and wait to see what happens. They'll kick you out in a second at least. Just like that. See, immoral freedom of speech is not welcome anywhere and probably this is what you meant. Bottom line - you cannot say what you want where you want it just like that - you still have to obey certain rules of society.

So I don't know what your problem really is, but ignorance is at the top of the list with your problems. And I tried to be the nicest guy here, so no offense ha?

If this is serious please explain exactly HOW all these things would change a Western society. No one can choose what they believe in. You bvelieve it or you don't. Due to the freedom of speech/thought we're priviledged to experience we know better than taking an old book as a way to live.Also some statistics to back up your claims would also be nice.

If you're trying to incite hatred towards Muslims please ask yourself why

Desiredbad - you're a victim of worldwide scaremongering - Stop focusing on extremes & try to ge to know some real Muslims. I was caught up too I confess, I thought they were nuts until I actually met a few & read more about Islam.

Schuhart

babyvaio wrote:

If Sharia Law was also the country law in these so-called highly developed western countries, then their morality would go sky-high, cos most of these moral (read: immoral) western values which so many people believe in nowadays would vanish into void:

I'd be interested in knowing where we might find a practical example of your Islamic Utopia. Would you have Saudi Arabia in mind? If not, where?

philologos

desiredbard wrote:

It is now wait and see what is going to happen with Aishah Amzi who wants to take her right to indoctrinate little children with her human right to impose extremists on little children.

how does wearing the niqab make you an extremist? Its their right to religious expression but this should had been banned for teachers or people in jobs of education as it is a barrier. I have no problem seeing any woman wearing the niqab down the road or the hijab (covers neck and hair). She was merely using the rights she has in Western society.

philologos

Schuhart wrote:

I'd be interested in knowing where we might find a practical example of your Islamic Utopia. Would you have Saudi Arabia in mind? If not, where?

I've heard that Kartoum in Sudan is practically crime free due to Shariah law but obviously there has been at some stage.

CiaranC

babyvaio wrote:

If Sharia Law was also the country law in these so-called highly developed western countries, then their morality would go sky-high, cos most of these moral (read: immoral) western values which so many people believe in nowadays would vanish into void:
- homosexuality
- drug traffic & addiction
- child abuse
- family violence
- adultery
- alcohol addiction & related problems
- unjust usury a.k.a. rip-off interest rates
- general immorality
- hipocrisy
- murder
- robbery
- inequality between sexes (yes, you got that right, i.e. women probably have less rights in west than in the Islamic countries)
- pornography
- paedophilia
- sexual harassment
- etc.

You left a few off the list:

-Democracy
-Freedom of speech
-Literacy
-Freedom of religion
-Secularism
-Sexual equality
-The ability to live free of poverty
-Freedom from totalitarianism
-Freedom from dictatorships
-Freedom from a police state
-Sexual liberation
-Education
-Scientific research

We already had the opportunity to live under a religious state here, the experiement resulted in a failed society just like the ones we see under Islam today, rife with poverty, sectarianism, oppression, state sponsored violent abuse, ignorance, cronyism, high infant mortality and disease.

Think I'll pass on the whole Islam thing thanks.

Wibbs

babyvaio wrote:

desiredbard, what's your problem BTW? you got scared that God's True Law might become The Law here in Ireland?

I can't speak for him but It's not my "god's" Law for a start.

And now let me tell you something extra. I've seen your initial post and the moderators in that particular subforum should be ashamed of themselves because they let you write what you wrote.

You see that would be freedom of speech right there. He wrote something and you or anyone else can object to it. He at least has the right to write it in the first place without some religious type looking over his shoulder(mod's notwithstanding).

Sharia Law is God's Law.

No again it's your God's law. Are you honestly that narrowminded that you can't even concieve others may not subscribe to your constrained worldview. You're precisely the type of Islam I'm phobic about.

It's your business if you believe in Him or not,

Well if Sharia law came in it wouldn't be his business anymore.

If Sharia Law was also the country law in these so-called highly developed western countries, then their morality would go sky-high, cos most of these moral (read: immoral) western values which so many people believe in nowadays would vanish into void:

I'm frankly shocked at your narrowminded naivete. BTW By comparison, those "backward" western nations are head and shoulders above the Islamic nations in pretty much every field of human endevour, health, longevity, innovation, technology, accountablity, social services, impartial judiciary etc. We're not perfect but that's the point we know we're not perfect. Makes adaptation easier.

- homosexuality

Eh no. People are born that way(presumably created by Allah that way)

- drug traffic & addiction

Where do a lot of those drugs come from today?

- child abuse/paedophilia

The history and current state of children living in Islamic states isn't exactly great now is it? As for the latter, there's all sorts of dodgy practices in some Islamic law with regard to that. For a start Mohammed married a nine year old while in his fifties. That might well be considered child abuse and paedophilia today.

- family violence

Given that there are instructions about beating one's wife in sharia that's highly debateable. While it's considered bad it's not outlawed.

- adultery

Yea right. All it may do is legitimise it by allowing second and third and fourth wives.

- alcohol addiction & related problems

Yep it may do that.

- unjust usury a.k.a. rip-off interest rates

Again that may work

- general immorality

Silly point.

- hipocrisy

Even sillier

- murder

Unless state sanctioned under law. In which case the gays, adulterers and non believers better watch out.

- robbery

Chopping off of hands will do that.

- inequality between sexes (yes, you got that right, i.e. women probably have less rights in west than in the Islamic countries)

Do not make me laugh. For a start a Muslim woman hasn't even got the basic freedom to travel without a family member with her. Whole other thread.

- pornography

Yes that would probably go.

- sexual harassment

Well since women would be restricted from mixing freely with men I could see that going away too.

The list is much longer and goes on and on.

Yes and includes slavery, less social services, no religious freedom by comparison to the west, ability to adapt to new scenarios, secular independant judiciary. The list goes on indeed.

Now about your so-called freedom of speech......

Adolescent argument TBH

Schuhart

Jakkass wrote:

I've heard that Kartoum in Sudan is practically crime free due to Shariah law but obviously there has been at some stage.

Can I say up front I’ve only dimly followed events in Sudan in recent years, but I still feel a need to query this.

I know conflicts are complex and rarely down to one thing. I’m mindful, for example, of how describing Northern Ireland as being about religion is far from the full story. But I thought imposition of the Sharia was at least one factor in at least one of the divisions in Sudan. So if petty crime is down in Khartoum (and I’d like to see some link substantiating that), they seem to have paid a very high price in other areas. Also, is Sudan regarded as a fearless defender of human rights?

If we’re taking Sudan as the benchmark of all the social benefits that the Sharia brings, fine. But I just wonder if this is really as good as it gets.

DeVore

What?! Have our country effectively run by a bunch of religious nutters?! It would take centuries to have church and state separated! *

.... oh.

DeV.

*Not to mention the amount of childabuse they could inflict during that time!

Karl Hungus

babyvaio wrote:

Sharia Law is God's Law. The very same and only God who created all this and created you as well, just so that you know. It's your business if you believe in Him or not, but you should know something. If Sharia Law was also the country law in these so-called highly developed western countries, then their morality would go sky-high, cos most of these moral (read: immoral) western values which so many people believe in nowadays would vanish into void:

- homosexuality
- drug traffic & addiction
- child abuse
- family violence
- adultery
- alcohol addiction & related problems
- unjust usury a.k.a. rip-off interest rates
- general immorality
- hipocrisy
- murder
- robbery
- inequality between sexes (yes, you got that right, i.e. women probably have less rights in west than in the Islamic countries)
- pornography
- paedophilia
- sexual harassment
- etc.

It isn't "God's Law" because god doesn't exist, and if he did happen to exist I'm certain that such a divine being would be a lot wiser than to impliment such infantile laws.

The fact of the matter is that sharia law is incredibly irresponsible in the sense that it blames arbitrary things as the causes of all society's evils, such as alcohol, gambling, money-lending and so on, but imparting none of the responsibility on the people whatsoever.

Sam Vimes

babyvaio wrote:

desiredbard, what's your problem BTW? you got scared that God's True Law might become The Law here in Ireland?

And now let me tell you something extra. I've seen your initial post and the moderators in that particular subforum should be ashamed of themselves because they let you write what you wrote. And what you wrote is full of hatred and hostility and even evil, but most of all - a complete ignorance. I honestly don't care where are you coming from and where are you going to, but I will advise you of a few things.

Sharia Law is God's Law. The very same and only God who created all this and created you as well, just so that you know. It's your business if you believe in Him or not, but you should know something. If Sharia Law was also the country law in these so-called highly developed western countries, then their morality would go sky-high, cos most of these moral (read: immoral) western values which so many people believe in nowadays would vanish into void:

where to begin?

well first, god doesn't exist. no god exists, not yours, not the christians and not apu nahasapeemapetilon's.


- homosexuality
nothing wrong with that. if one man wants to have sex with another in the privacy of his own home i have no right to stop him

- drug traffic & addiction
- child abuse
- family violence
- murder
- robbery
- paedophilia
- sexual harassment

they're illegal under our laws too. would switching to sharia law somehow make them more illegal?


- adultery
its a horrible thing to do but it shouldn't be a crime. i think sharia law gets around it by making adultery legal (4 wives and all that) but only for men, and they're the only important ones aren't they?


- alcohol addiction & related problems
if someone wants to drink himself to death who am i to stop him?

- unjust usury a.k.a. rip-off interest rates
that's not illegal but in a democracy companies have competition and so anyone charging unjust usury will just go out of business. that's the beauty of freedom


- general immorality
define please. it seems your view of morality is different to mine. what makes your version of morality better than mine? both versions were apparently written by gods. there is no more evidence to support the existence of your god over any other so why should i believe the muslim gods rules instead of the christians? hell i might just go back and follow zeus's rules if it takes my fancy

that's kind of why religion started in the first place. people such as mohammad and jesus wrote these moral laws but knew no one would listen to them so they said "its not me saying, its god so you have to listen"

- hipocrisy
why on earth should that be illegal? 90% of the world's population would have to die.


- inequality between sexes (yes, you got that right, i.e. women probably have less rights in west than in the Islamic countries)
ummm...... women here have equal rights. women in fundamentalist (i.e. not all) muslim countries have no souls and are not allowed to leave their houses with their faces showing or unaccompanied by men. how exactly do they have equal rights?

do they take turns? on mondays, wednesdays and fridays the women wear the veil and are completely subservient and on tuesdays, thursdays and saturdays its the men's turn. how do they deal with sundays?

- pornography
again, none of my business


most of the stuff you mentioned is already illegal in our society and the rest involves private individuals doing things that have no effect on anyone except themselves or consenting partners. i see no reason whatsoever to change to your somehow superior version of "morality"

my morality can be summed up as: "do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

i don't tell you how to live your life so kindly go away and stop telling me how to live mine.

your view is exactly the same as all bigots worldwide. they all think their way of life is the best and try to force it on everyone around them.

of course, liberal democracy is the best because you can live your life by whatever moral code you want. the only limitation is that you can't force others to do the same. things that affect others like murder, rape etc are already illegal and the rest are none of your business. if i want to go to hell for looking at a picture of a naked women, who are you to stop me


i must ask, in muslim countries, are there no murders? are there no rapes? is nothing ever stolen?

if sharia law is so perfect and utopian and prevents all acts of "immorality" in a way that western society does not, why are there prisons in muslim countries?


edit:
are you taking the piss?


edit2: that guy who said they should fly the flag of islam on leinster house and said his way is the best is in fact saying that our way is best. he wants the freedom to come to a foreign country and tell them that they're doing everything wrong and they should do it his way. if i went to his country and did the same i'd only get half way through my speech before being strung up. he wants to use the fact that we're tolerant of others to preach intolerance of everyone who's different to himself. sounds a bit hypocritical, eh babyvaio?

Sam Vimes

desiredbard wrote:

Untill you can give me some exsamples of that I kindly considder that bull****

http://exchristian.net/exchristian/2006/10/phelps-cancels-protest-at-amish-girls.html

there you go. she's a christian and she's quite the nutcase

desiredbard

Schuhart wrote:

I don't know, this guy has been trying hard to be subjected to a fatwa, without success.

I think there is a legitimate debate to be had about areas where there would be conflict between Islamic doctrine and the liberties we take as part of the furniture. There is also a legitimate debate about where an amount of Islamic thinking falls into 'Penny Catechism' simplisticness. But, in fairness, this is not altogether different to the long road we've travelled with Catholicism. It's just a bit disheartening to get to the end of that road and have to start again with a new group of people with a similar mindset.
Is this good enough?

The movement was not encouraged by the Irish hierarchy, whose members viewed its extremism with suspicion and desired not to become associated with Fr Fahey's long record of anti-Semitic writings and public statements.

So not happening everyday and peoople spoke out against it, as far as i'm concerned its was a small sekt like the Jehova's.

desiredbard

babyvaio wrote:

desiredbard, what's your problem BTW? you got scared that God's True Law might become The Law here in Ireland?

And now let me tell you something extra. I've seen your initial post and the moderators in that particular subforum should be ashamed of themselves because they let you write what you wrote. And what you wrote is full of hatred and hostility and even evil, but most of all - a complete ignorance. I honestly don't care where are you coming from and where are you going to, but I will advise you of a few things.

Sharia Law is God's Law. The very same and only God who created all this and created you as well, just so that you know. It's your business if you believe in Him or not, but you should know something. If Sharia Law was also the country law in these so-called highly developed western countries, then their morality would go sky-high, cos most of these moral (read: immoral) western values which so many people believe in nowadays would vanish into void:

- homosexuality
- drug traffic & addiction
- child abuse
- family violence
- adultery
- alcohol addiction & related problems
- unjust usury a.k.a. rip-off interest rates
- general immorality
- hipocrisy
- murder
- robbery
- inequality between sexes (yes, you got that right, i.e. women probably have less rights in west than in the Islamic countries)
- pornography
- paedophilia
- sexual harassment
- etc.

The list is much longer and goes on and on. Now about your so-called freedom of speech. You still cannot say what you want in the west without consequences. There are rules. You don't live in a jungle so you can scream like you know who and nobody says a word. If you think freedom of speech is absolute, then go and try to publish something nasty about someone who has a so-called high position in society or power to stop you and you'll see what happens. Or try and go to opera and start screaming like you know who and wait to see what happens. They'll kick you out in a second at least. Just like that. See, immoral freedom of speech is not welcome anywhere and probably this is what you meant. Bottom line - you cannot say what you want where you want it just like that - you still have to obey certain rules of society.

So I don't know what your problem really is, but ignorance is at the top of the list with your problems. And I tried to be the nicest guy here, so no offense ha?

As a Roman Catholic your post nearly would make me yearn for the Spanish Inquisition.

I asked a normal question and you read hatred in that?
I base my question on common knowledge and news stories.
And giving everyone the benifit of my doubt a chance to react to a question that one can ask in a free western civilisation

I did not even point out certain historical facts of this prophet (In my religion he most certainly is not one but that is called freedom of religion) and I do not mean the youngest of his 12 wives although Islam does not even allow you that many, does it now?

Oh, Saoudi Arabia is the only country in the world where you can buy Yeast by the kg in a supermarket.
Funny to see a woman in burka have 5 kg and some sugar in her trolley and hear the clerk advise: "No m'am you need more sugar for that amount"

But the scary thing right here is that I really was just asking an honoust question. Now I beg yer pardons if I missed a reply, but the only muslim reacting so far is as mad in the head as the guy quoted in the OP, in my opinion.

DeVore

Funny, cos I see you both as more or less the same, the only difference being the imaginary friend you sacrafice people to.

DeV.

Sgt. Sensible

DeVore wrote:

Funny, cos I see you both as more or less the same, the only difference being the imaginary friend you sacrafice people to.

DeV.

The imaginary nutter friend is one and the same in judaism, christianity and islam.

It's important to stand up against superstition without buying into the racist agenda of the far right.

Sam Vimes

desiredbard wrote:

The movement was not encouraged by the Irish hierarchy, whose members viewed its extremism with suspicion and desired not to become associated with Fr Fahey's long record of anti-Semitic writings and public statements.

So not happening everyday and peoople spoke out against it, as far as i'm concerned its was a small sekt like the Jehova's.

the bloke who wanted the islamic flag flown over leinster house was on today fm the other day and the head of islam in ireland gave him an awful time of it. he's banned him from speaking in any irish mosque and is against everything he stands for. that nutcase does not speak for islam. he's the islamic version of the kkk or ian paisley. he's an example of a christian nutcase who holds the highest office in northern ireland. how's that for encouraging it?


and did you watch my video about the phelps woman?

Schuhart

desiredbard wrote:

As a Roman Catholic your post nearly would make me yearn for the Spanish Inquisition.

In which case the rest of us would hardly be able to tell you apart.

In principle, any charge you could lay at the door of Islam would seem to equally apply to Catholicism. The only difference is passage of time - Islam today is closer to Irish Catholicism, say, fifty years ago when the Church had largely unquestioned control over health, education and public morality.

the only muslim reacting so far is as mad in the head as the guy quoted in the OP, in my opinion.

Or, alternatively, a clueless young lad struggling to stay afloat in the discussion, and feeling he has to make some effort to defend the indefensible or he’s letting the side down. Picture a clueless Irish Catholic of fifty years ago suddenly pitched into the company of people who actually had a command of the history of the Church and were used to discussion. You'd find much the same incoherence and blind assertion.

Sam Vimes

come on babyvaio, you've failed abysmally to show how sharia law is better than our own other than you get to force your own conservative views on everyone around you. i'd like to see if you can explain further what we're all missing out on

Schuhart

And, on a practical point, can we accept that if Islamic finance products were cheaper than interest bearing loans, we'd all be using them.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Commander Vimes wrote:

edit:
are you taking the piss?

I was suspicious myself... Check out the other threads he started - One very good one about getting into heaven as a Christian actually. However the REALLY sad thing is this guy's for real.

Talliesin

desiredbard wrote:

Untill you can give me some exsamples of that I kindly considder that bull****

That priest that invented a national dress for Ireland featuring a kilt with the Star of David in the front. The woman that danced with rosary beads outside the front of the GPO. Dozens of weirdos in every little hamlet and village in the country.

Captain Trips

The only time a "muslim flag" (by that I take it the meaning is a flag of crescent moon, after the arabian pre-Islam pagan moon-god) (that seems to be a universal symbol of islam) would be flying over Leinster House is if the SUltan of Brunei builds a replica of the building in his back garden, or if Dubai has one next to the Al-Arabiya hotel.

A busload of people couldn't just do a protest march on O'Connell street without a riot breaking out.

Islam flag over leinster house lol!

Hobbes

Schuhart wrote:

And, on a practical point, can we accept that if Islamic finance products were cheaper than interest bearing loans, we'd all be using them.

You mean Irish banks would offer us something that actually makes them less money? Is this bank run by leprechauns?

the_new_mr

Was away for a while so didn't see this thread till now.

Shocking amount of ignorance on this thread... from nearly everyone (quite disappointed and surprised at some).

Please go here to try and remedy this ignorance.
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=Zone-English-Discover_Islam/DIEZone

If anyone wants to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of Sharia law in a civilised manner then I invite them to do so one topic at a time in the Islam forum.

Victor

desiredbard wrote:

Well what would happen if some RC fanatic would plead the return of the spanish inquisition

To fall into a cliché, they haven't gone away you know. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is a standing organisation.

Sam Vimes

the_new_mr wrote:

If anyone wants to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of Sharia law in a civilised manner then I invite them to do so one topic at a time in the Islam forum.

i hate to split hairs but this thread was already moved out of the islam forum

the_new_mr

Yeah I know but that's because the thread subject was slightly different to the proposed subject of discussing particular points of the sharia law.

On second consideration though I guess it would probably degrade into a thread like this one and would unlikely be very fruitful.

CiaranC

Posters arent allowed to criticise Islam in the Islam forum, so there is little point in most of us posting there.

desiredbard

Commander Vimes wrote:

the bloke who wanted the islamic flag flown over leinster house was on today fm the other day and the head of islam in ireland gave him an awful time of it. he's banned him from speaking in any irish mosque and is against everything he stands for. that nutcase does not speak for islam. he's the islamic version of the kkk or ian paisley. he's an example of a christian nutcase who holds the highest office in northern ireland. how's that for encouraging it?
and did you watch my video about the phelps woman?

I agree with most of your points although; who banned him from speaking in mosques? The Irish government or the followers of Mohammed?

Sgt. Sensible wrote:

The imaginary nutter friend is one and the same in judaism, christianity and islam.

It's important to stand up against superstition without buying into the racist agenda of the far right.

Agree with that appart from that Historically Mohammed and Jesus are a bit appart where timeframe and morality are concerned. If you are talking about a suopreme being or power.... You might be right however the writings of Mohammed have in my opinion warped and distorted the character of that being. Your are of course fully entitled to have your views, I wont charge you any head taxes for it

desiredbard

CiaranC wrote:

Posters arent allowed to criticise Islam in the Islam forum, so there is little point in most of us posting there.

Posters are not even allowed to ask a question to the "believers" in that forum.
I wonder if the same policy aplies to the RC forum?

Sam Vimes

desiredbard wrote:

I agree with most of your points although; who banned him from speaking in mosques? The Irish government or the followers of Mohammed?

as i said, the head of islam in ireland. they were both on the last word on today fm and were quoting the qaran at each other and he kept saying the nutcase was misquoting it to support his own bigotry

CiaranC wrote:

Posters arent allowed to criticise Islam in the Islam forum, so there is little point in most of us posting there.

yeah, it doesn't strike me as a forum that vibrantly supports discussion and debate

Wibbs

Schuhart wrote:

Or, alternatively, a clueless young lad struggling to stay afloat in the discussion, and feeling he has to make some effort to defend the indefensible or he’s letting the side down. Picture a clueless Irish Catholic of fifty years ago suddenly pitched into the company of people who actually had a command of the history of the Church and were used to discussion. You'd find much the same incoherence and blind assertion.

A very good take on the matter.

Talliesin wrote:

Dozens of weirdos in every little hamlet and village in the country.

True enough. They haven't all gone away that's for sure. I think as others have said it's almost like we're looking at old catholic ireland through a time machine. The only difference I can se is that there's more of a political/social/legal framework in Islam that makes it harder to seperate church and state when compared to our homegrown variety of religious rule. As well, if the stats in places like Britain and France are to be believed there does seem to be a large section of the Islamic community that want the introduction of such laws(for various reasons). Stats being stats, it's hard to figure precisely what that means. It could range from someone wanting marriage, banking and inheritance laws in keeping with their faith all the way to taliban style nuttery. Also who did they ask? I'm sure if you only polled opus dei the slant you would get about Irish Catholics would be very skewed. What's interseting about such stats is from what I can see it seems the second and third generation are the ones clamouring more for it when compared to the parents. That says more about integration than anything. Those who feel out of step with the society are more likely to yearn for this idea of golden age etc.

Hobbes wrote:

You mean Irish banks would offer us something that actually makes them less money? Is this bank run by leprechauns?:)

Yea sign me up for that one too.:D

the_new_mr wrote:

Shocking amount of ignorance on this thread... from nearly everyone (quite disappointed and surprised at some).

Possibly, though it does show the level of feeling on both sides about the issue. As an example on the subject of equality of the sexes, in the end the two cultures see "equality" as different. Different but equal being the Muslim one(in basic terms). The two viewpoints are quite far apart.

Please go here to try and remedy this ignorance.
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/S..._Islam/DIEZone

Good plan. Check out the other side to the story too as Islam like Christianity has many faces and modes of thought. The "fighting" verses in the Quran and hadeeth would be a good example. Many would say they only applied back then. Others would say they only apply in special circumstances, while others would hold they apply exactly now as then. One set of revelations, many interpretations(though killing innocent, non combatants frowned upon in all cases).

Book 008, Number 3310:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.
Hmm.A bit suspect on the anti-paedophilia claim.

Does Iran not have a very high rate of it's population taking heroin?

What is wrong with homosexuality?Yes it is correct to execute homosexual people because they are sinners.Great morals come with sharia law.

Jakkass

Jakkass wrote:

I've heard that Kartoum in Sudan is practically crime free due to Shariah law but obviously there has been at some stage.

Is there not a genocide going on the same country started by Muslim extremists.

Wibbs

Deleted User wrote:

Book 008, Number 3310:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.
Hmm.A bit suspect on the anti-paedophilia claim.

That's a little more complex than it first appears, though yes it is very suspect from our perspective.

Does Iran not have a very high rate of it's population taking heroin?

Not really the issue as that would be illegal under Sharia.

What is wrong with homosexuality?Yes it is correct to execute homosexual people because they are sinners.

Slight problem alright.

Great morals come with sharia law.

Maybe better to say different morals come with sharia law. The two systems are far apart in many ways. The biggest difference and problem I'd have is the lack of flexibility in the face of change.

Schuhart

Hobbes wrote:

You mean Irish banks would offer us something that actually makes them less money? Is this bank run by leprechauns?

I'm suggesting the practical experience is that Islamic finance products tend to cost more.

There's a few ways of looking at it. One is, the institution needs to share the risk of interet rate movements over the life of the loan with the client. Banks are unlikely to take on an extra risk without charging for it, so they do.

I don't doubt the original intention of the prohibition on usury was to protect people from unfair business terms. However, the substance of that intention seems to be taking second place to following the letter of the prohibition - not an uncommon thing to find in many religions.