''Islam is a religion of peace'' (debate)

4Sheets

Cant even have a peaceful thread about the damm thing..what does that tell you!!!..I have no idea what is racist about what I said??..But I guess this is the wrong thread to be discussing the problems muslims and muslim intergration will cause.
Continue your fine intellectual debate gentlemen...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFYPfmH_U0k

Turtwig

4Sheets wrote: »

.I have no idea what is racist about what I said??

Oh I don't know, elevating your "race" above all others?

coffee_cake

4Sheets wrote: »

Cant even have a peaceful thread about the damm thing..what does that tell you!!!..I have no idea what is racist about what I said??.

Sure you do

4Sheets

Malty_T wrote: »

Oh I don't know, elevating your "race" above all others?

I said to respect our own race..that implies nothing about not respecting other races..amazing how easy it is to labelled a racist.

robindch

4Sheets wrote: »

amazing how easy it is to labelled a racist.

I think you managed that yourself in this post. As per my previous message, you're now on a week's holiday.

Brown Bomber

Malty_T wrote: »

No it did not. Now can you deal with the relevant point made by the doomsday doctor ?

Clearly it did.

Originally Posted by Brown Bomber View Post
No. It's not self defence it is capital punishment. Something which is not exclusive to to Islam and is beyond the scope of this debate IMO.

--->

In every single debate I have heard this topic come up, I have heard the same two excuses come up, "It's not just us" and "It's not relevant".


I've not heard an actual answer to the question once.

Why would a religion of peace condone the painful murder of a human being over what is, at the end of the day, not even considered a crime in most societies, frowned upon or not?

This indicates prejudice.

a (1) : preconceived judgment or opinion (2) : an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge

As for for the other points. I believe I did address them in response to another poster who made the same point at the same time.

Turtwig

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Clearly it did.



--->



This indicates prejudice.

a (1) : preconceived judgment or opinion (2) : an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge

As for for the other points. I believe I did address them in response to another poster who made the same point at the same time.

Ok fine it did. Now, can you address the actual point made by the evil doctor?

Brown Bomber

4Sheets wrote: »

When was it debunked as nonsense..must have missed that debunking..

http://www.scribd.com/doc/18996398/In-Defence-of-British-Muslims

4Sheets wrote: »

I know it will not happen because crap and all as EU goverment is people are awakening..Is it an accident that Marie LePen is a contender for president of France??....nope people are feed with how some immigrants treat the countries that host them..I expect Britain to follow suit.
Time people had respect for their own race and stop being afraid of being called narrow minded or racist for having a view that offends minorities.

I'm an immigrant myself. I'm part of a religious minority. I fully respect my new homeland and it's people and culture, pay a lot of taxes, have never been unemployed or in trouble with the law etc etc Do you fear me?

Also your conflating race with religion. You can be an native Irish Muslim y'know. Who will they fight for in the epic upcoming civil war?

That said, while I think you are spitting out hatred I do respect your honesty. I suspect that there are a lot more like you but are in the closet.

4Sheets wrote: »

Thanks for the link but If I wanted to learn about Islam I would do so
myself..fact is Im not likely to convert anytime soon.

Surely if your gearing up for a clash of civilizations you should want to learn about Islam to make sure you are fighting and potentially dying for the right team?

Brown Bomber

Malty_T wrote: »

Ok fine it did. Now, can you address the actual point made by the evil doctor?

I'll try. For clarity are we talking about adultery/stoning here?

Why would a religion of peace condone the painful murder of a human being over what is, at the end of the day, not even considered a crime in most societies, frowned upon or not?

dead one

dlofnep wrote: »

Ah, the no true Scotsman argument.

Ah yes, then define insanity?

dlofnep wrote: »

What's 'true' Islamic faith? No - I have not learned Islamic faith by reading an anti-Islamic thread. I have watched the actions and reactions of Islamic nations for years - and compared and contrasted their reactions with other secular nations.

here i want to share something-- that is
"Assume that you want to gauge the latest model of the Mercedes. Now you put a person who does not know how to drive at the steering wheel and he bangs up the car, who will you blame? The car or the driver? Of course, the driver. To analyze the car, one should not look at the driver. Rather the specifications of the car should be inspected like how fast is it, what is the fuel consumption, safety measures etc. Therefore if we really want to gauge Islam then judge it according to authentic sources i.e. glorious Quran, the Hadith or by its best follower, prophet Mohammed (PBUH). "--

dlofnep wrote: »

Could I go to any Islamic nation tomorrow and spit on a picture of Muhammad and not be punished?

Yes, it is true actions of Islamic nation has made muhammad a psychopath.... But that's not problem with Prophet Muhammad and his message...that's problem with Islamic nation, better you should blame those muslim hypocrites who misuse Islam.... Prophet was last in the lines of Prophets.. He was just a messenger of God like Jesus,Moses, Adam etc.... He has done nothing harm to the world but cure the world from corruption, A world, which is trying to find God in worldly objects, A world---which say, that we are product of chances, our destiny is measured by chance........:)--- You can spit, but your wasted spit and your wasted existence can't put dirt on the message of Muhammad....

dlofnep wrote: »

spit on a picture of Muhammad and not be punished?

He who spits towards the sky is spitting on his face. ...

Standman wrote: »

Now when you read what I actually said:

You said, Islam isn't religion of peace, indirectly, it means 99% aren't peaceful---it also means those who follow islam are violent and aren't peaceful....... I have shown you the facts, which contradict your statement....[/quote]

Standman wrote: »

then you see how your whole post is completely irrelevant to my original one.

How you will prove me that Islamic isn't religion of peace... Don't tell muslim are doing this?

Wibbs

dead one wrote: »

Therefore if we really want to gauge Islam then judge it according to authentic sources i.e. glorious Quran, the Hadith or by its best follower, prophet Mohammed (PBUH). "

OK then I suggest people do just that and read the above and about the above. There's an awful lot of damning and killing going on. Think of it as old testament part 2. Peace is conflated with submission and submission to a local 7th century version of the Abrahamic god and his followers. Peace to outsiders is a lot less clearcut. Mohammed's character isn't exactly squeaky clean either. You would not want to be around him or someone following his example to the letter for very long if you didn't completely agree with him. You'd likely have a short lifespan.

Thankfully the vast majority of Muslims don't follow him in this, but the nutters didn't pick this stuff up out of the ether. Indeed the more religious they tend to become the more "nutty" and backward they tend to become with it. Like "old time religion" old testament christians/jews. The god of all three is written as a vengeful petty murderous person with genocidal tendencies and constant mood changes. Islam can be more of a worry as they've never had a reformation and the inbuilt self preservation of the texts kinda precludes this. One of the reasons they never had an age of enlightenment outside of a very early flowering.

Brown Bomber

dlofnep wrote: »

The punishment for apostasy in Islam? Death.

This is incorrect. Far more accurate to say
"A punishment for apostasy in Islam? Death."

dlofnep wrote: »

The reaction for those who 'insult' Muhammad? Murder, riots and signs calling on the death of those who insult him. .

Again this is incorrect. Far more accurate to say
"A minority reaction for those who 'insult' Muhammad? Murder, riots and signs calling on the death of those who insult him. .

dlofnep wrote: »

Islam is an faith of intolerance. .

Again you are wrong to speak in such absolute terms. How can you justify the judging of the whole by the actions of a minority?

dlofnep wrote: »

Intolerance and peace are not compatible.

Peace is a less likely condition with intolerance factored in but I fail to see how it is impossible.

This verse you've quoted does not support what you said either.

33:57] Indeed, those who abuse Allah and His Messenger - Allah has cursed them in this world and the Hereafter and prepared for them a humiliating punishment.

This is not justification for violence by Muslims to defend Allah but rather saying that thodr who insult Allah will be the victim of a supernatural curse from the Heavens on earth and in the afterlife.

Brown Bomber

Wibbs wrote: »

Islam can be more of a worry as they've never had a reformation and the inbuilt self preservation of the texts kinda precludes this. One of the reasons they never had an age of enlightenment outside of a very early flowering.

I actually think this is an excellent point, the best made in thread so far.

Wibbs

Brown Bomber wrote: »

This is incorrect. Far more accurate to say
"A punishment for apostasy in Islam? Death."

It pretty much amounts to the same thing though BB. Even if another punishment was "apostates shalt be showered in kittens", which is more likely to be followed human nature being what it is.

Again this is incorrect. Far more accurate to say
"A minority reaction for those who 'insult' Muhammad? Murder, riots and signs calling on the death of those who insult him. .

Well there is a serious amount of backup for death to insulters from the very early stages of the faith itself. Criticism of Mohammed in his own lifetime shortened lives more than it didn't.

Again you are wrong to speak in such absolute terms. How can you justify the judging of the whole by the actions of a minority?

To be fair all faiths have a built in "intolerance" to the "other" to "unbelievers" to some degree or other. It's in the nature of the beast. Buddhism would have the least of that, others would be as you said supernaturally intolerant, but in the here and now not so much. Islam has a goodly mixture of both in word and deed.

This is not justification for violence by Muslims to defend Allah but rather saying that thodr who insult Allah will be the victim of a supernatural curse from the Heavens on earth and in the afterlife.

No but it's not exactly aiming for tolerance among the living. Add in all the other Quranic passages and hadith examples calling for and demonstrating a very earthly "defence" of Allah and it most certainly doesn't comfort.

I actually think this is an excellent point, the best made in thread so far.

There are some very clear examples of it too. The first printed bible was in the 1450's. The Muslim world was exposed to the printing press before Europe and yet the first printed Quran is in 1800 and it was printed in Russia. The first printed Quran in the Islamic world? Early 20th century in Egypt. The chasm is huge. Not just in printing. Science, medicine, engineering, politics, human rights all lagged behind the "christian" west.

The problem is BB I can't see how they can have a reformation. The only way might be a majority swing to Quran only Muslims. That would "modernise" the entire Islamic lifestyle to a great degree. I think where many brought up in the Christian faith in the west fall down when thinking of Islam is there is this notion that "ah sure it's like Christianity. Same God you know". Muslim apologists will also make this claim. Some Muslims do too, but less so. There are fundamental differences between the two. Not so much religious ones. Islam is very much an all encompassing religion. The lifestyle is a major part and parcel of it. This lifestyle is pickled in 7th century Arabic thinking. The various dress codes for women and men would not look wrong 1300 years ago. The lifestyle trickles through every facet of life. How to dress, how and what to eat etc. Politically it's a very different animal too. The concept of separation of church and state can be hard to fathom in the culture. It was never set up like this. The faith is the state and how everyone operates in that state. When folks like dead one talk of a failure of modern Islamic states it's set against that background. Democracy is not particularly compatible with Islamic political thinking. The "perfect" Islamic state would be a theocracy run by a religious elite over which a Caliph would reign. Ballot boxes not required. That's more a "kaffir" notion. Of course there are Muslims and Muslim majority states where democracy is practiced, but they're more local, less Arabic versions of Islam.

Christianity is different and has been from the start. While various christian churches and their leaders have exercised or tried to exercise political power, the faith itself provides an "out" for that while retaining the faith. Jesus came out with "give all to Caesar that's Caesar's" and "my kingdom is not of this earth", both statements clearly drawing a line between the religious and the secular powers and statements that would have choked in the throat of Mohammed. Even at the height of medieval church power both strands were there. A social and political reformation was a big part of this.

dlofnep

dead one wrote: »

Yes, it is true actions of Islamic nation has made muhammad a psychopath.... But that's not problem with Prophet Muhammad and his message...that's problem with Islamic nation, better you should blame those muslim hypocrites who misuse Islam....

So, all of the Islamic nations are hypocrites - and not the minority of Muslims that live outside of the said Islamic states? You're avoiding the question. Islam is intolerant to criticism. I could go to London tomorrow, and burn a picture of Muhammad on TV - and as soon as I'm sitting here, a day later - I'd have a protest calling for my death.

dead one wrote: »

Prophet was last in the lines of Prophets.. He was just a messenger of God like Jesus,Moses, Adam etc.... He has done nothing harm to the world but cure the world from corruption, A world, which is trying to find God in worldly objects, A world---which say, that we are product of chances, our destiny is measured by chance........:)--- You can spit, but your wasted spit and your wasted existence can't put dirt on the message of Muhammad....

You're avoiding the question. I don't actually want to spit on a picture of Muhammad - I've better things to do that to intentionally annoy people. My point is that I _should_ be able to insult Muhammad if I so wanted to, without fear of reprisal. Islam is the only faith that is offered this luxury. TV stations ban taunts of Muhammad out of fear of attack.

I believe in freedom of speech. Islamic nations do not. If you are trying to state that Islamic nations that hold a huge portion of the world's Muslim population are not reflective of Islam - then your head is in the sand.

dead one

Wibbs wrote: »

OK then I suggest people do just that and read the above and about the above. There's an awful lot of damning and killing going on.

Like Alqaeda or terrorists..... The case of Alqaeda is quite doubtful, So you can't relate that case to Islam. Right!!!!!..... You want to look clear picture about Islam.... You should read quran....Now, see the verse below.... Quran clearly gives importance to human life, Now if a person kills an innocent, he doesn't follow Islam or religion of God.... Read the verse with detail explanation, given in the link..

On that account We ordained for the Children of Isra`il that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole humanity: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the whole humanity. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear (guidance), yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. (5:32)

the Qur`an continues, corrects, completes and perfects earlier religious traditions. This is illustrated by the verse discussed in the article linked below . The verse continues earlier tradition by building on a principle found in the Talmud. It corrects earlier tradition by rejecting the ethnocentric version of the principle which talks only of saving/killing an Isra`ili life. It completes the earlier tradition by mentioning the important exceptions under which the life of a human being can be taken. Finally, it perfects the earlier tradition by improving even the universalist version in the Talmud. In the Talmud the killing/saving of a man is like killing/saving of all his descendents. In the Qur`an the killing/saving a man is like killing of the whole humanity, regardless of whether they descend from him or not, thus greatly increasing the value of a human life. Moreover, the Qur`an reduces the crimes punishable by death to only two very basic crimes and even in these cases the death penalty is not mandatory.
http://www.islamicperspectives.com/TafsirOfSurah5_32.html#04000001
Now, again God prohibited murder of innocents.... if a person who kills innocent he doesn't belong to any religion.....I hope you would get the point

Wibbs wrote: »

Think of it as old testament part 2. Peace is conflated with submission and submission to a local 7th century version of the Abrahamic god and his followers. Peace to outsiders is a lot less clearcut.

I dont' believe in old testament, I believe in original revelations which were revealed to Prophet Moses and Prophet Jesus.... Now, what was written in those original revelations, quran tells you.... majority of bible is corrupted by human ideas and interpretations....

And [mention] when Jesus, the son of Mary, said, "O children of Israel, indeed
I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad." But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, "This is obvious magic."
http://quran.com/61/6

Wibbs wrote: »

Mohammed's character isn't exactly squeaky clean either. You would not want to be around him or someone following his example to the letter for very long if you didn't completely agree with him. You'd likely have a short lifespan.

So, should i follow you--- Do you have character?.... We don't follow Muhammad, we follow Message of God.... and God says to follow Muhammad...... Muhammad was messenger of God like many messenger before .... He gave the world, the real idea of God... why, because ,christian and jew had corrupted the true Idea given by all the messenger of God..... Christian believe in three gods yet they say that they believe in one God.... Now why God sent his last message to muhammad, because of the corruption in the original idea of God.... God sent down his messengers again and again whenever the idea got corruption by human inventions....

Wibbs wrote: »

Thankfully the vast majority of Muslims don't follow him in this, but the nutters didn't pick this stuff up out of the ether. Indeed the more religious they tend to become the more "nutty" and backward they tend to become with it. Like "old time religion" old testament christians/jews. The god of all three is written as a vengeful petty murderous person with genocidal tendencies and constant mood changes. Islam can be more of a worry as they've never had a reformation and the inbuilt self preservation of the texts kinda precludes this. One of the reasons they never had an age of enlightenment outside of a very early flowering.

Thankfully the vast majority of world is suffering.... If you don't follow God then you will suffer, You can't change human nature--- You can't change the human desires which tend to go towards evil.... You can't distinguish "good" and "evil" by yourself if you follow your desires.... You need no God in your life--- why?----have you ever wonder? because of sickness of your desires--- What makes desires sick---- that is giving priority the material world than of God.... A Heart which really believes in God and his existence--Desires can't corrupt it....... It is your desire to live in this mortal forever but Quran tells to your desires ---- All the creation in heavens and earth (expect human) follow God....

"So is it other than the religion of Allah they desire, while to Him have submitted [all] those within the heavens and earth, willingly or by compulsion, and to Him they will be returned?"
http://quran.com/3/83

Delirium

dead one wrote: »

Thankfully the vast majority of world is suffering.... If you don't follow God then you will suffer, You can't change human nature--- You can't change the human desires which tend to go towards evil.... You can't distinguish "good" and "evil" by yourself if you follow your desires.... You need no God in your life--- why?----have you ever wonder? because of sickness of your desires--- What makes desires sick---- that is giving priority the material world than of God.... A Heart which really believes in God and his existence--Desires can't corrupt it....... It is your desire to live in this mortal forever but Quran tells to your desires ---- All the creation in heavens and earth (expect human) follow God....

"So is it other than the religion of Allah they desire, while to Him have submitted [all] those within the heavens and earth, willingly or by compulsion, and to Him they will be returned?"
http://quran.com/3/83

you're thankful the majority of the world is suffering? you realise that sort of attitude is why people don't consider islam a religion of peace.

and your quote saying that compulsion will be used to get people to follow islam. that's forcibly making people a member of the religion. not very peaceful sounding to me.

dead one

dlofnep wrote: »

So, all of the Islamic nations are hypocrites - and not the minority of Muslims that live outside of the said Islamic states? You're avoiding the question. Islam is intolerant to criticism. I could go to London tomorrow, and burn a picture of Muhammad on TV - and as soon as I'm sitting here, a day later - I'd have a protest calling for my death.

I am talking about that part of islamic nation, which comes in context of your previous statement

I have watched the actions and reactions of Islamic nations for years

You have watched the actions of reactions of hypocrites because you prefer hypocrisy.... Don't mind, why i am saying this because your statement has no link with your previous statements.....

dlofnep wrote: »

So, all of the Islamic nations are hypocrites - and not the minority of Muslims that live outside of the said Islamic states?

have you seen actions and reaction of all the muslim living in those states--- I guess no--- You prefer only those actions and reactions which torche your reason--- Right--- I am a muslim , i feel no pain, what ever you write against Muhammad.... or even you insult him.... Why because i follow Muhammad and his message--- and his message was love and peace.. He spread Islam through wisdom and love--- Don't blame Islam for Ignorance--- You hate islam because of hypocrites-- Why you don't hate hypocrisy?--- I have given clear answers if you could get it, then i can't force into your minds--- a mind which ...... Should i tell you about your mind -- what your posting is reflecting about your mind....

dlofnep wrote: »

You're avoiding the question. I don't actually want to spit on a picture of Muhammad - I've better things to do that to intentionally annoy people. My point is that I _should_ be able to insult Muhammad if I so wanted to, without fear of reprisal. Islam is the only faith that is offered this luxury. TV stations ban taunts of Muhammad out of fear of attack.

Majority of People are ignorant about religion, they tend to believe what ever they were told in the name of religion.... You want to find reality you have to look into scripture-- the source of religion..... Here is exact verse which condemn their actions

It is not for a human [prophet] that Allah should give him the Scripture and authority and prophethood and then he would say to the people, "Be servants to me rather than Allah ," but [instead, he would say], "Be pious scholars of the Lord because of what you have taught of the Scripture and because of what you have studied."
http://quran.com/3/79

I believe in freedom of speech. Islamic nations do not. If you are trying to state that Islamic nations that hold a huge portion of the world's Muslim population are not reflective of Islam - then your head is in the sand.

which islamic nation you are talking about, please give me referencce of that islamic nation, which truly refect message of Islam....

dead one

koth wrote: »

you're thankful the majority of the world is suffering? you realise that sort of attitude is why people don't consider islam a religion of peace.

if you choose corruption because of your freewill with having clearing knoweldge then i am thankful to you for choosing corruption... I am thankful to your choice-- that you may think what you have chosen yourself... The suffering which you see in the world is because of people's choice....

koth wrote: »

and your quote saying that compulsion will be used to get people to follow islam. that's forcibly making people a member of the religion. not very peaceful sounding to me.

All creation other than human submit themselve willingly or by compulsion to Allah... The point when every rule in the universe follow God what makes human not to follow God...... There is no compulsion in Islam-- It is way of quran to make people understand....

Delirium

dead one wrote: »

if you choose corruption because of your freewill with having clearing knoweldge then i am thankful to you for choosing corruption... I am thankful to your choice-- that you may think what you have chosen yourself... The suffering which you see in the world is because of people's choice....

so you are thankful that majority of the world is suffering, and I'm the corrupted one?

All creation other than human submit themselve willingly or by compulsion to Allah... The point when every rule in the universe follow God what makes human not to follow God...... There is no compulsion in Islam-- It is way of quran to make people understand....

I refer you to the quote you posted.

"So is it other than the religion of Allah they desire, while to Him have submitted [all] those within the heavens and earth, willingly or by compulsion, and to Him they will be returned?"
http://quran.com/3/83

Wibbs

dead one wrote: »

Like Alqaeda or terrorists..... The case of Alqaeda is quite doubtful, So you can't relate that case to Islam. Right!!!!!..... You want to look clear picture about Islam.... You should read quran....Now, see the verse below.... Quran clearly gives importance to human life, Now if a person kills an innocent, he doesn't follow Islam or religion of God.... Read the verse with detail explanation, given in the link..

You do realise that verse is aimed at Jews in a historical context? And it's ok to kill in the case of "spreading mischief in the land"? That's a wide net being cast there.

Now, what was written in those original revelations, quran tells you.... majority of bible is corrupted by human ideas and interpretations....

OK so the Quran tells you the Quran is right? Brilliant logic. You do realise the other religions tell them they're right.

So, should i follow you--- Do you have character?.... We don't follow Muhammad, we follow Message of God.... and God says to follow Muhammad......

So you do follow Mohammed then?

Muhammad was messenger of God like many messenger before .... He gave the world, the real idea of God... why, because ,christian and jew had corrupted the true Idea given by all the messenger of God.....

According to Mohammed. Again with the brilliant logic.

Christian believe in three gods yet they say that they believe in one God....

Actually they don't, they believe in three aspects of the same god. The Jews believed in many gods and Yahweh was at the top. Echoes of which you can still find in the old testament.

Now why God sent his last message to muhammad, because of the corruption in the original idea of God.... God sent down his messengers again and again whenever the idea got corruption by human inventions....

God seems really bad at preserving his revelations. Except for Mohammeds of course. Third try is a charm.

Thankfully the vast majority of world is suffering....

Jesus:rolleyes:

You can't change the human desires which tend to go towards evil.... You can't distinguish "good" and "evil" by yourself if you follow your desires....

Depends on your "desires" most people seem to do it pretty well. God or not.

Why because i follow Muhammad and his message--- and his message was love and peace.. He spread Islam through wisdom and love---

Really? Then why did he need armies? Buddha didn't need armies or a religious state to spread initially. Jesus didn't need armies or a religious state to spread initially. All that came later and in those cases can be described as a corruption of the original message. Muhammed built up an army, waged war, conquered areas, killed and enslaved enemies. And you think this is spreading by peace?

Majority of People are ignorant about religion, they tend to believe what ever they were told in the name of religion.... You want to find reality you have to look into scripture-- the source of religion..... Here is exact verse which condemn their actions

Well I've read the Quran and two of the Hadith. I did so many years ago, long before this more recent Islamaphobia and it was an eye opener.

which islamic nation you are talking about, please give me referencce of that islamic nation, which truly refect message of Islam....

There has never been one. Including Muhammeds. Looking at his and the first Islamic states they're not exactly good advertisements for peace. Lots of killing going on. IIRC three out of the first four caliphs were assassinated. It's been war and strife in the name of Allah from the start. What hope is there for a modern Islamic state being "perfect" if the very first Muslims couldn't achieve it?

robindch

Wibbs wrote: »

OK so the Quran tells you the Quran is right? Brilliant logic. You do realise the other religions tell them they're right.

Been six months since I last posted this update on an old favourite.

dlofnep

dead one wrote: »

You have watched the actions of reactions of hypocrites because you prefer hypocrisy....

Who are you to judge them as hypocrites? They are following what Islam teaches them. What makes your view more correct than their view? Do you speak Arabic fluently out of curiosity?

dead one wrote: »

have you seen actions and reaction of all the muslim living in those states--- I guess no--- You prefer only those actions and reactions which torche your reason--- Right--- I am a muslim , i feel no pain, what ever you write against Muhammad.... or even you insult him.... Why because i follow Muhammad and his message--- and his message was love and peace..

His message was NOT love and peace.

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

Qur'an (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."

Qur'an (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them."

Qur'an (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

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

So give over, and stop pretending Islam is a religion of peace, and that somehow these people are 'hypocrites'. They are doing what they have been told to do.

dead one wrote: »

He spread Islam through wisdom and love---

No, he didn't. He spread Islam through fear and war. Have you actually read the Qur'an?

dead one wrote: »

which islamic nation you are talking about, please give me referencce of that islamic nation, which truly refect message of Islam....

How would you know what the true message of Islam is? What makes your interpretation of Islam more accurate than anyone else?

MrPudding

koth wrote: »

Apologies kylith, just checked with someone in the know, and you're correct. They kill the animals in the manner you described.

The restaurant where I work started using halal chicken. I objected to this and was assured that it, like all halal meat in the UK, was pre-stunned.

MrP

Delirium

MrPudding wrote: »

The restaurant where I work started using halal chicken. I objected to this and was assured that it, like all halal meat in the UK, was pre-stunned.

MrP

thats what I thought too, but asked someone who works with people in the meat sector and he informed me that I was wrong. T

MrPudding

koth wrote: »

thats what I thought too, but asked someone who works with people in the meat sector and he informed me that I was wrong. T

Perhaps Ireland is different...

EDIT: A link to a story... http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2010/sep/20/halal-meat-the-truth

MrP

Brown Bomber

dlofnep wrote: »

His message was NOT love and peace.

Your doing exactly what Islamic extremists do. Quoting verses out of context. I have to wonder how you even came across these verses as you've said you've reached your conclusions on Islam through "watching actions & reactions". Did you google "violence. Quran"?

dlofnep

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Your doing exactly what Islamic extremists do. Quoting verses out of context. I have to wonder how you even came across these verses as you've said you've reached your conclusions on Islam through "watching actions & reactions". Did you google "violence. Quran"?

Perhaps you'd care to put every single verse I've quoted into context? Or are you going to continue with hollow rebuttals?

philologos

dlofnep wrote: »

Perhaps you'd care to put every single verse I've quoted into context? Or are you going to continue with hollow rebuttals?

Brown Bomber has a point. If you are going to criticise the Qur'an or any other text you should make sure that you have a full knowledge of that text. It's like doing a book review without having read the book.

I have a question for dead one. Why do you keep using the term "nation of Islam"? Is it because Islam inherently has political aspirations or is it just a term used?

Turtwig

philologos wrote: »

Brown Bomber has a point. If you are going to criticise the Qur'an or any other text you should make sure that you have a full knowledge of that text. It's like doing a book review without having read the book.

If I said that to someone who's terrified of Nuclear Power how would they react? Likewise if I said it to someone voting on the Lisbon Treaty. That need-to- be-fully-qualified-before-criticising is a very dangerous and slippery slope.