Why do muslims hate democracy

[sojourner]

Response: Free will not to sleep with someone does not answer the fact that being promiscuous is not what is best for society. So promiscuity is condemned in Islam. Furthermore, the welfare of society is not just economics, but morality as well.

So it's moral to keep your women beat down. Yet another damning statement for your religion. You're doing a great job proving our point -- please, keep it up! :jam:

 

[YmirGF]

So it's moral to keep your women beat down. Yet another damning statement for your religion. You're doing a great job proving our point -- please, keep it up! :jam:

Response: Thus proving, yet again, that you cannot meet the Qur'an challenge. Well done, Sparky.

 

[sojourner]

Response: Thus proving, yet again, that you cannot meet the Qur'an challenge. Well done, Sparky.

I really thought we'd done with him, since he didn't post here yesterday. Oh well...

 

[Estro Felino]

Response: Free will not to sleep with someone does not answer the fact that being promiscuous is not what is best for society. So promiscuity is condemned in Islam. Furthermore, the welfare of society is not just economics, but morality as well.

Give me a reasonable explanation why promiscuity of few people (the people who decide to be promiscuous) is not what's best for society.

ah..and one more thing: do not tell me please that people will imitate the promiscuous...you know...copycats lack both fantasy and intellectual autonomy.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Apologies, I missed this for some reason.

Response: Once again, the Qur'an challenge is presented in post 28 in simple basic English.

Yes, the words are simple. This doesn't make the challenge clear. There is a clear advantage to your position in making the challenge unclear, and I would like to remove wiggle-room before wasting my time with a detailed response.

So if you need assistance is understanding simple English, then there is nothing I can do for you, as you clearly speak a different language. One cannot simplify what is already in its simplest from.

Yeah...so petty insults are probably not particularly helping your argument. Happy to compare English language skills, qualifications, or whatever else, if you really want to have a ******* contest. Honestly, that has nothing to do with your failure to define terms.

So I will repeat:

Step 1. Try using a speech or literature that does not agree with the likes of a majority of people, which has been made up by a person/s.

Step 2. Then use that very same speech to inspire them to conquer a nation, or even just the street you live on, for you to rule.

It's that simple. You can include whatever you like in the process. Whether by force , marching, singing, war, etc. It does not matter. As long as steps one and two is involved.

This is simple English. So to respond by saying you still need clarification after this is invalid. Thus there is no need to continue.

Fidel Castro?
Pol Pot?

Or are you still sticking to your ridiculous premise that I have to personally inspire the takeover of a nation or street?

 

[Parsimony]

I admit that I don't know very much about Islam, but are we even sure that the Qu'ran itself meets the Qu'ran challenge? How do we even know that the people who felt inspired by it to conquer a nation did not agree with what it had to say? Are there any sources outside the Qu'ran itself to support that notion?

 

[sojourner]

I admit that I don't know very much about Islam, but are we even sure that the Qu'ran itself meets the Qu'ran challenge? How do we even know that the people who felt inspired by it to conquer a nation did not agree with what it had to say? Are there any sources outside the Qu'ran itself to support that notion?

I think the whole "Koran Challenge" thing is hooey -- smoke and mirrors designed to make Islam appear invincible. Apparently, everyone in the world but Al knows differently.

 

[Smart_Guy]

mirrors designed to make Islam appear invincible.

Vampires!

 

[Woodrow LI]

Contrary to popular belief Sharia law is quite democratic and not much different from the US legal system.

Here is how the Hanafi Madhab of Shariah is set up and the basis for the various laws.

LINK

 

[outhouse]

Contrary to popular belief Sharia law is quite democratic and not much different from the US legal system.

Here is how the Hanafi Madhab of Shariah is set up and the basis for the various laws.

LINK

Did not help these poor Christians burned alive.

Christian Couple Killed By Mob For 'Blasphemy'
The husband and wife, known only as Shama and Shehzad, were beaten to death. Their bodies were then burned in the brick kiln where they worked.

But whether someone is convicted of making derogatory remarks or not, even the slightest allegation has been known to lead to violent killings, as the law is often misused to deliberately target minorities.

 

[LightTraveler]

Western governments are for theocracy also. Only they do it in secret. And theirs is called "Satanism" under the guise of secularism.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Western governments are for theocracy also. Only they do it in secret. And theirs is called "Satanism" under the guise of secularism.

Yeah, no.

 

[outhouse]

And theirs is called "Satanism" under the guise of secularism.

? maybe you have some kind of example of this voodoo

 

[LightTraveler]

voodoo! hahaha Since you actually used that term, I won't bother. You'll find out on Judgement Day.

 

[outhouse]

voodoo! hahaha Since you actually used that term, I won't bother. You'll find out on Judgement Day.

Im so scared of your mythology LOL



I wish theist would do a little historical work before posting evidence of how little they know on any given topic.

 

[LightTraveler]

Oh I see, you're just another mean-spirited person who enjoys insulting others while hiding behind a computer screen.
Typical mainstream American. Since you think it's all mythology, I have to wonder why you're even a member of a message board called "religiousforums". And don't give me that "I have a right to be here". That's not the point. The point is, "why"? I think I already have the answer. Because like many atheists, you just like to share your disagreement with those who don't agree with you. Enjoy your life of unearned privilege while you still can.

 

[outhouse]

Oh I see, you're just another mean-spirited person

So you make a eternal threat to me, then tell me what kind of spirit I have.


By the way, spirit is mythology and they do not exist at this point in time outside mythology.


I study Jesus on a historical level, as well as the NT in general as well as the ethnogenesis of Israel.

There is more to debate here then apologetics, reality is at stake. This is a religious education forum. You don't have to follow the educated but you can learn here if you do.

 

[walkthetalk]

Response: The one that is true has the authority, which is the Qur'an.

As a matter of fact. First 4 leaders of Islamic state were elected by the Muslims of the time after the Prophet left the world. What do we call this?

 

[Al-Fatihah]

So it's moral to keep your women beat down. Yet another damning statement for your religion. You're doing a great job proving our point -- please, keep it up! :jam:

Response: Yet nothing in Islam says to keep women beat down. Exposing another weak rebuttal that supports the fact that Islam is just. Thanks.

 

[Al-Fatihah]

Give me a reasonable explanation why promiscuity of few people (the people who decide to be promiscuous) is not what's best for society.

ah..and one more thing: do not tell me please that people will imitate the promiscuous...you know...copycats lack both fantasy and intellectual autonomy.

Response: Rather, you should provide a reasonable explanation to justify such a question. For you have no logical reason or evidence that shows that being promiscuous is better than not being it. Thus such a question has no merit.