Why Islam makes more sense conceptually of all the Abrahamic faiths

[Marsh]

I also see no "big brother" attitude in Dark-aged Theocracies like Saudi-Arabia, the most holy site of Islamic pilgramedge, where people can go to jail for ten years or more for simply starting a blog online that says nothing negative about Islam, but "we would be better off more secular".

You are so right.

There is the recent story of seventeen year old Maedeh Hojabri of Iran. She has been sentenced to four years in prison and 20 - 100 lashes (I don't recall the exact number) and her crime is two-fold. She posted videos of herself dancing (she is very, very good) and she is not wearing an hijab. By Iranian law all women must wear hijabs in public or risk jail time. So they are going to strip her to the waist and some ***-hole is going to flog her until the skin on her back come off.

There is also a movement in Iran were women are whipping off their hijabs and taking pictures of themselves in front of the government billboards warning women to cover-up. Large numbers have been arrested.

 

[shunyadragon]

Europe, America, Canada, Russia, and Australia have more Christians than other Religions, and in this century don't legally torture and kill people for not being Christian.

Your selective reasoning to justify your agenda fails. 'Cherry picking' fallacy..

Example: Guantanamo torture prison along with other locations in Europe.

Many Muslim majority countries legally did this, and took Christian and Muslim Shiite women and prepubescent girls as sex-slaves!

We did the same with Negro slaves and Native Americans.

No brass ring nor Cuppy doll for your 'cherry picking.'

 

[Spiderman]

I hadn't even thought of the point you bring up. And Jesus is known to have gone into a Pub and drink wine, mulled or not. Lutherans drink also ...

I agree that the Quran, especially the Yusuf Ali interpretation is likely quite accurate. I'm of the opinion that the Hadiths inaccurately recorded, and Fatwas are what took Islam away from the view that Muhammad PBUH had.

Drinking wine is not Barbaric.

Muhammad was an extremist, radical, fanatic, bloodthirsty terrorist, who committed countless vicious sadistic crimes against humanity!

He had multiple wives, got rich and powerful stealing and looting, and didn't respect the rights of a prepubescent girl too young to consent!

Amazing how Muslims think drinking wine is a crime but defending a mass-murderer and pedophile is okay!

 

[Spiderman]

You are so right.

There is the recent story of seventeen year old Maedeh Hojabri of Iran. She has been sentenced to four years in prison and 20 - 100 lashes (I don't recall the exact number) and her crime is two-fold. She posted videos of herself dancing (she is very, very good) and she is not wearing an hijab. By Iranian law all women must wear hijabs in public or risk jail time. So they are going to strip her to the waist and some ***-hole is going to flog her until the skin on her back come off.

There is also a movement in Iran were women are whipping off their hijabs and taking pictures of themselves in front of the government billboards warning women to cover-up. Large numbers have been arrested.

Very sad!

Iran is a lot more tolerant and nicer to their women than the average Arab nation, so it is disheartening to hear that!

 

[Ellen Brown]

You are so right.

There is the recent story of seventeen year old Maedeh Hojabri of Iran. She has been sentenced to four years in prison and 20 - 100 lashes (I don't recall the exact number) and her crime is two-fold. She posted videos of herself dancing (she is very, very good) and she is not wearing an hijab. By Iranian law all women must wear hijabs in public or risk jail time. So they are going to strip her to the waist and some ***-hole is going to flog her until the skin on her back come off.

There is also a movement in Iran were women are whipping off their hijabs and taking pictures of themselves in front of the government billboards warning women to cover-up. Large numbers have been arrested.

I've heard about this. Iran's religious leader is pretty radical.

 

[Spiderman]

Your selective reasoning to justify your agenda fails. 'Cherry picking' fallacy..

Example: Guantanamo torture prison along with other locations in Europe.



We did the same with Negro slaves and Native Americans.

No brass ring nor Cuppy doll for your 'cherry picking.'

I'm talking about 21st century. And no, I'm not cherry-picking.

Abuse of prisoners is wrong, but it is different than Christians torturing and killing people legally, in the real world outside of prison, for not being Christian.

 

[stvdv]

The documented words of Jesus were sometimes more civilised than 21st century Americans and Europeans, like "love your enemies" "turn the other cheek"

Sounds more like a female politician telling a fighter how he should act on the battlefield to me.

Jesus lived in Pagan Roman empire, which was arguably more barbaric than Saudi-Arabia.
They used Christians as torches at the Olympic games, crucified people, pulled out their teeth, poured hot liquid led down their throats, and fed them to wild beasts.

Quite barbaric. My guess is that Jesus was a tough guy. Carrying His own cross++. I wouldn't be surprised if The Church changed the story to make it a best seller.

 

[shunyadragon]

I'm talking about 21st century. And no, I'm not cherry-picking.

That my friend is the supreme Cherry Picking. Guantanamo still exists.

19th and 20th century are not ancient history.

Abuse of prisoners is wrong, but it is different than Christians torturing and killing people legally, in the real world outside of prison, for not being Christian.

Guantanamo was not legal by US law nor international law.. It is the same whether you put people in prison or not.

 

[stvdv]

That my friend is the supreme Cherry Picking. Guantanamo still exists.

19th and 20th century are not ancient history.

Guantanamo was not legal by US law nor international law.. It is the same whether you put people in prison or not.

I perfectly understand what @PopeADope says. In my country they don't stone you to death in public. Just to give an example. There is a clear difference.
A female friend of mine is from Iran. She escaped from there. She told me "it was not so nice", to say it nice. Heaven in Europe.

 

[Spiderman]

That my friend is the supreme Cherry Picking. Guantanamo still exists.

19th and 20th century are not ancient history.



Guantanamo was not legal. It is the same whether you put people in prison or not.

How about you read my post again.
I'm concerned about what is happening in my lifetime:

Europe, America, Canada, Russia, and Australia have more Christians than other Religions, and in this century don't legally torture and kill people for not being Christian.

Many Muslim majority countries legally did this, and took Christian and Muslim Shiite women and prepubescent girls as sex-slaves!

So, you are the one speaking falsehood and misquoting me.
People detained in prison are not necessarily being tortured for being non-Christian.
Arguably they are being tortured for being terrorists or fighting American War on terror.

I was speaking of people being tortured and killed legally for the crime of adhering to a different faith.

So, It's quite easy to win an argument with you!

That doesn't make torture justified under any circumstance, but your post is irrelevant in response to what I posted.

Muslims are torturing and killing people legally and publicly for not being Muslim, or for being accused of adultery or homosexuality. No first-world Christian country legally does this to people for the crime of not being Christian, adultery, or homosexuality.

21st century Islamic regimes legally took non-muslim women and prepubescent girls as sex-slaves.

The tortures at Guantanamo were violations are a breach of human rights laws, therefore are not sanctioned or legal. It is way different than 21st century Islamic atrocities which were often committed legally. Meaning it was sanctioned by the people who were in power.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Hi Adrian, this is correct. Jews and Christian are considered the People of the Book, and so have semi-protected status not afforded to those of other religions. That does not mean they have not been relentlessly persecuted and harassed under Islam. Besides, this is not really and example of an Islamic state acting toward Jews and Christians like a big brother. There are numerous recent instances of Christian congregations throughout the Middle East suffering murderous attacks. And everyone knows that wherever Islam goes anti-Semitic attacks soar.

Hi Marsh,
Many Eastern Orthodox Christians felt they were better treated by the Ottomans than the Roman Catholic Church. The sacking of Constantinople resulting from a failed Christian crusade was not easily forgotten or forgiven.

At one stage Islam under the Abbasids was THE greatest and most progressive civilisation that had ever been. The Islamic Golden age is credited by many historians as one of the most significant influences igniting the European Renaissance. Unfortunately it was a steady decline under the Ottomans as Western civilisation flourished. Then again I’ve heard estimates of up to 40% of Europe’s being killed as a result of conflict arising from the schism arising between Protestants and Catholics.

So while Islam clearly distinguishes itself through fanaticism, violence and persecution of other religions, Christians have an abysmal record too, especially in regards anti-semitism.

 

[shunyadragon]

How about you read my post again.
I'm concerned about what is happening in my lifetime:

I read your post it is cherry picking.

So, you are the one speaking falsehood and misquoting me.
People detained in prison are not necessarily being tortured for being non-Christian.
Arguably they are being tortured for being terrorists or fighting American War on terror.

There is abundant evidence they were stereotyped as Muslims. In fact some of the detainees in Guantanimo and other torture facilities never committed any crimes.

I was speaking of people being tortured and killed legally for the crime of adhering to a different faith.

So, It's quite easy to win an argument with you!

That doesn't make torture justified under any circumstance, but your post is irrelevant in response to what I posted.

Muslims are torturing and killing people legally and publicly for not being Muslim, or for being accused of adultery or homosexuality. No first-world Christian country legally does this to people for the crime of not being Christian, adultery, or homosexuality.

21st century Islamic regimes legally took non-muslim women and prepubescent girls as sex-slaves.

The tortures at Guantanamo were violations are a breach of human rights laws, therefore are not sanctioned or legal. It is way different than 21st century Islamic atrocities which were often committed legally. Meaning it was sanctioned by the people who were in power.

No win with fallacies abundo to justify your agenda!!

 

[stvdv]

Then again I’ve heard estimates of up to 40% of Europe’s being killed as a result of conflict arising from the schism arising between Protestants and Catholics.

The West has improved a lot. They murdered plenty in the past, even Jesus was murdered.

The violence in name of Islam is happening still now
This 40% you are talking about, is that from recent years?
We should "stay in the present, now" to compare things

The past is useful to understand why violence happens

 

[Spiderman]

I read your post it is cherry picking.


So, you are the one speaking falsehood and misquoting me.
People detained in prison are not necessarily being tortured for being non-Christian.
Arguably they are being tortured for being terrorists or fighting American War on terror.

I was speaking of people being tortured and killed legally for the crime of adhering to a different faith.



No win with fallacies abundo to justify your agenda!!

Quote one thing I said that was false.

Guantanamo has many prisoners who belonged to terrorist regimes. Arguably they are not being tortured legally, and they could likely be tortured for being terrorists and fighting America, not being tortured for being non-Christian.

Some of them could be falsely accused, but even then, their crime for going to prison wasn't being non-Christian. Their crime was suspicion of them being a terrorist, fighting America, or breaking some other law.

Muslims on the other hand legally detain, torture, and kill people for speaking the truth about Muhammad or the Qur'an or being non-muslim.

Find for me evidence of one person detained at Guantanamo for the crime of being non-Christian.

Until you can do that, you have lost the argument as well as made a false accusation against me!

 

[shunyadragon]

I perfectly understand what @PopeADope says. In my country they don't stone you to death in public. Just to give an example. There is a clear difference.
A female friend of mine is from Iran. She escaped from there. She told me "it was not so nice", to say it nice. Heaven in Europe.

It is not a matter of whether @PopeADope was right or not about the problems in contemporary Islam in some Islamic countries, To add I am a Baha'i, and I cannot travel in some Islamic countries, because of the persecution of Baha'is.

The problem is that it is a universal problem in history and scripture throughout the history of Judaism and Christianity, and recently Islam.

 

[Dawnofhope]

The West has improved a lot. They murdered plenty in the past, even Jesus was murdered.

The violence in name of Islam is happening still now
This 40% you are talking about, is that from recent years?
We should "stay in the present, now" to compare things

The past is useful to understand why violence happens

How about the genocide of six millions Jews during WWII? Is that too far back?

 

[shunyadragon]

The tortures at Guantanamo were violations are a breach of human rights laws, therefore are not sanctioned or legal. It is way different than 21st century Islamic atrocities which were often committed legally. Meaning it was sanctioned by the people who were in power.

Many in Guantanimo were put there without evidence nor cause, and it was because they were Muslims.

From:https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/most-guantanamo-detainees-are-innocent-ex-bush-official-1.804550

Most Guantanamo detainees are innocent: ex-Bush official

Many detainees locked up in Guantanamo Bay were innocent men swept up by U.S. forces unable to distinguish enemies from noncombatants, a former Bush administration official said Thursday.

"There are still innocent people there," Republican Lawrence B. Wilkerson, former chief of staff to then-secretary of state Colin Powell, told the Associated Press. "Some have been there six or seven years."

Wilkerson, who first made the assertions in an internet posting on Tuesday, told the AP he learned from briefings and by communicating with military commanders that the U.S. soon realized many detainees held at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, were innocent but nevertheless held them in hopes they could provide information for a "mosaic" of intelligence.

"It did not matter if a detainee were innocent. Indeed, because he lived in Afghanistan and was captured on or near the battle area, he must know something of importance," Wilkerson wrote in the blog.

He said intelligence analysts hoped to gather "sufficient information about a village, a region, or a group of individuals, that dots could be connected and terrorists or their plots could be identified."

Wilkerson, a retired Army colonel, said vetting on the battlefield during the early stages of U.S. military operations in Afghanistan was incompetent with no meaningful attempt to discriminate "who we were transporting to Cuba for detention and interrogation."

 

[shunyadragon]

How about the genocide of six millions Jews during WWII? Is that too far back?

The pogroms against Jews by Christians go back much further than WWII, and the Holocaust was just an extention of .this.

 

[shunyadragon]

Quote one thing I said that was false.

Guantanamo has many prisoners who belonged to terrorist regimes. Arguably they are not being tortured legally, and they could likely be tortured for being terrorists and fighting America, not being tortured for being non-Christian.

Some of them could be falsely accused, but even then, their crime for going to prison wasn't being non-Christian. Their crime was suspicion of them being a terrorist, fighting America, or breaking some other law.

Muslims on the other hand legally detain, torture, and kill people for speaking the truth about Muhammad or the Qur'an or being non-muslim.

Find for me evidence of one person detained at Guantanamo for the crime of being non-Christian.

Until you can do that, you have lost the argument as well as made a false accusation against me!

False by the fallacy of 'cherry picking.'

Again . . .

Many in Guantanimo were put there without evidence nor cause, and it was because they were Muslims.

From:https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/most-guantanamo-detainees-are-innocent-ex-bush-official-1.804550

Most Guantanamo detainees are innocent: ex-Bush official

Many detainees locked up in Guantanamo Bay were innocent men swept up by U.S. forces unable to distinguish enemies from noncombatants, a former Bush administration official said Thursday.

"There are still innocent people there," Republican Lawrence B. Wilkerson, former chief of staff to then-secretary of state Colin Powell, told the Associated Press. "Some have been there six or seven years."

Wilkerson, who first made the assertions in an internet posting on Tuesday, told the AP he learned from briefings and by communicating with military commanders that the U.S. soon realized many detainees held at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, were innocent but nevertheless held them in hopes they could provide information for a "mosaic" of intelligence.

"It did not matter if a detainee were innocent. Indeed, because he lived in Afghanistan and was captured on or near the battle area, he must know something of importance," Wilkerson wrote in the blog.

He said intelligence analysts hoped to gather "sufficient information about a village, a region, or a group of individuals, that dots could be connected and terrorists or their plots could be identified."

Wilkerson, a retired Army colonel, said vetting on the battlefield during the early stages of U.S. military operations in Afghanistan was incompetent with no meaningful attempt to discriminate "who we were transporting to Cuba for detention and interrogation."

 

[stvdv]

How about the genocide of six millions Jews during WWII? Is that too far back?

Yes that is too far back.

But apart from that, that is in war time.

I was talking about The Laws that Muslim Countries have that are so much more cruel than our Laws.