I guarantee you that every "violent" verse is take

Post Reply New Topic

You really are a very silly person.

Can you name any Christian country in the world that carries this out? Or carries out the barbaric stuff that's listed in the Bible? (I'll give you Uganda, which wants to kill gay people. There are quite a number of Caribbean countries and Christian African countries that are disgusting on the issue of LGBT rights.)

That's the point that a lot of you Muslims are (deliberately?) failing to understand. There's a lot of inhuman stuff in Christian texts, but almost none of it is carried out these days. One cannot say the same about what is in Sharia.

There's a lot of inhuman stuff in Christian texts, but almost none of it is carried out these days.

The issue is that a popular interpretation of the Qur'an is setting a very proper pretext for certain Muslim groups all over the world to commit all sorts of inhumane deeds against others.

And what do the more peaceful Muslims do in response? Instead of arguing here in the forums about how the Qur'an doesn't promote terrorism, why don't I see you guys doing something to stop what the other Muslims are doing all over the world?

Don't blame the Taliban - By: Kunwar Khuldune Shahid

Let’s call a spade a spade instead

The Malala incident is déjà vu times million. You have religious ‘extremists’ manifesting brutality; the ‘educated’ class calls the act heinous, the ‘intellectuals’ label the offenders as beasts, the ‘liberals’ protest against the ‘cowardly act’ and while everyone is condemning the act, they remain shushed about the root cause of it all: the ideology. Throughout the past every single person who has denounced the Taliban has acted as an apologetic, justifying the religious ideology and claiming how those ‘uneducated morons’ have ‘unfortunately’ misinterpreted the teachings of peace and tranquility – no, they haven’t, ‘unfortunately’.

It is so painfully amusing to note how the ‘moderates’ and armchair revolutionaries, would sit there with a glass of vine in their hands, uninhibitedly hanging out with the opposite sex, not having offered a prayer or fasted for ages, claiming how the Taliban – who lead their lives strictly according to the Shariah – are infesting their religion of harmony. The poor chaps are only doing what their scriptures – the ones that the pseudo intellectuals extol, or don’t have the cojones to criticize – tell them to do. When you are being taught, through the scriptures that are universally recognized by the followers as ‘authentic’, that all the non-believers or threats to the grandeur of your ideology should be killed, you will kill them, where is the misinterpretation here?

Finding slaves or slave girls, repulsive; physically assaulting women, disgusting; cutting off hands for theft, inhuman; stoning people to death, beastly and then venerating the ideology that permits this at the same time is hypocrisy of the very highest order. You sit there, criticize and mock the Taliban that follow your religion in its true form while you live in oblivion with your extremely palatable, but simultaneously blatantly fallacious, brand of religion and then claim that the Taliban are misinterpreting and misapprehending your ideology? Oh, the irony.

Let’s stop carving out quasi religions, or defending ideologies that we’ve all grown up blindly following as the truth. Let’s call a spade a spade instead and realize that at the end of the day as much as you might have a cardiac arrest admitting it, the root cause of religious extremism is: religion – especially in its raw crude form, which again is the only ‘authentic’ form.

Every single religion has a violent streak. Every single one of them orders violence and killing in one form or the other for the ‘non-believers’. One can quote verses from every holy scripture depicting loathe and despise for anyone who doesn’t believe in the said scripture and its propagator. Sure, those scriptures would have the occasional fit of peace as well, but that only springs into the open when it is recognized as the only supreme authority. Every religion is a ‘religion of peace’ as long as it formulates the status quo; there is no concept of ideological symbiosis in any religion. When a tyrannical regime or dictator calls for peace with the condition that they would reign supreme we label them as oppressors, but when this is done in the name of religion we tout it as maneuvers of ‘harmony’.

The Taliban have defended the attack on Malala Yousafzai through scriptures and historic precedents. You can clamor all you want about how there is a lack of understanding on the part of the Taliban, but how on earth can you refute clear messages of violence and historical evidence – scribed by historians of your faith – depicting brutality on the part of some of the most illustrious people in the history of the religion? It is easy to launch vitriol against the Taliban for attacking a 14-year-old girl, but it is also equally hypocritical and pathetic when you eulogize people from your history who did the same in the past, who massacred masses, destroyed lands, pulverized places of worship, raped women, just because they ostensibly did it in the name of your religion. Don’t blame the Taliban for following their lead, don’t blame the Taliban for using violence as a means to cement religious superiority – something that has been done for centuries – don’t blame the Taliban for the fact that you don’t have the guts to call a spade a spade even though it has been spanking your backside for centuries now.

The fact that groups like Tehreek-e-Taliban-Pakistan and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi exist is because Islam is still traversing its Dark Ages while other religions have gone through Reformation, resulting in a collective Renaissance – and that too half a millennium ago. None of the religion in its crude form can work in this day and age, and instead of taking the easy route and scorning at those that follow religious teachings in its original form, the more logical approach would be to accept the truth.

If you’re acknowledging Islam as the supreme authority, you have no grounds for hauling coals over Zia-ul-Haq for implementing laws from the Shariah, you have no grounds for attacking Mumtaz Qadri or feeling sorry for Salmaan Taseer who clearly spoke against the blasphemy law, you have no grounds for lauding Dr Abdul Salaam as a national asset who belonged to a sect that clearly defies Islamic teachings, and yes, you have no grounds for blaming the Taliban.

It’s time our ‘thinkers’ stopped taking the easy way out and finally picked a side. You either follow a religion in its true form or you’re irreligious. The Taliban know which side they are on. Do you?

I have Muslim relatives myself (one of my aunts, now a widow, was married to a Muslim and wears the hijab), and even though they claim to be peaceful and not violent at all, they still show support for what certain Muslim terrorists do in the name of Allah.

Which is kind of ironic and pisses me off.

Go lead a religious revolution or something against Muslim terrorism and then come preach to us about the peacefulness of the Qur'anic verses.

I'll tell you what we do think. We think the defenders of Islam are massive liars who cannot take responsibility for their religion and admit when their religion is the problem. Everything 'good' that is related to Islam is as a result of Islam but absolutely anything 'bad' is nothing to do with Islam. Give me a break.

While I agree that Islamic violence is clearly evident and the reasons for this violence is taken from their holy text, I do not agree that the inhumanity in Christianity is not being carried out today.

Christian text ""Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." is being used in Africa to justify the murder of 1000's.

But your question to name any Christian countries which carries out barbaric stuff that's listed in the bible, is showing your bias.

I have no bias, I am an anti-theist and therefore do not excuse one group over any other.

You go on to discount Africa & the Caribbean

The numbers of barbaric acts can be mapped to the level of education within each geographical area. The less educated a region is, the more likely they are to take religious text literally and act on such texts.

Being a resident of the UK, I have greater concerns over most of our MPs being religious (one type no better than the other)

and the fact that we have 26 (CoE) bishops sitting in the House of Commons.

Remove the Christian slant and we could stop tolerating all the rest with our freedom to have any religion.

Those who only oppose one type of religion would vote for the likes of Nigel Farage (UKIP) a Christian, who I trust no more than any Muslin politician.

I'm a "defender of Islam" and I never said this.

So, you're a defender of a murderous 7th century Arab warlord.

Any reason why that particular one and not any of the other many Arab warlords from that era?

You really are being very silly.

Can you name any Christian country in the world that carries this out? Or carries out the barbaric stuff that's listed in the Bible? (I'll give you Uganda, which wants to kill gay people. There are quite a number of Caribbean countries and Christian African countries that are disgusting on the issue of LGBT rights.)

That's the point that a lot of you Muslims are (deliberately?) failing to understand. There's a lot of inhuman stuff in Christian texts, but almost none of it is carried out these days. One cannot say the same about what is in Sharia.

Salad, unfortunately Tequila's right. Speaking as a pantheist, the Christian Bible contains some pretty horrific stuff, and Christians have done pretty horrific stuff in the past. Here in the US, Christians are much more problematic than are Muslims because they think that they should have the right to turn the US back into a Puritan state. Thankfully, they do not currently have any power except to drag the Republican Party down into a hole.

]However, right now, there are little girls who are being killed for having been raped; there are little girls being sold to old men for brides, sometimes even before puberty; there are little girls having their genitals mutilated; there are new atheists and new Christians and new Buddhists, or whatever, under threat of death for having deconverted from Islam; there are people accused of theft having their hands or feet cut off. etc, etc, etc - and ALL of this is justified by the people who do it with the phrase, 'Allah wills it.' Less than I week ago I heard a chieftain say that he had no choice but to cut off his brother-in-law's hand after he was accused of theft by the Al Quaida branch that he had deserted, with no trial but a statement of the accusation in front of some elders - 'It's not me that orders it, it is the will of God.'

So, you're a defender of a murderous 7th century Arab warlord.

Any reason why that particular one and not any of the other many Arab warlords from that era?

SO WHAT?? If these actions contradict Islam, then why must Islam be blamed??? The bolded are actually forbidden in Islam. BTW Islam's penalty of thieves is actually WORKING, unlike America's. Question, which country has the highest theft rates?? There you go. As much as the Taliban are extremists, I will say AT LEAST criminals don't dare commit crimes under fear of severe penalty. No matter what part of Islam you criticize, you have no right to ever criticize Islam's criminal justice. It's the only criminal justice that actually works in this world. A murderer should be murdered, not jailed. In this country murderers receive a few years in jail, which isn't really a punishment when in jail you can workout, have fun, play sports, etc. What punishment is that?? Islam has a very strict criminal system, simply because in order to eliminate crime rates you have to eliminate criminals, and which criminal on EARTH would even dare steal while knowing the penalty is losing a hand?? Islam isn't just about punishing and disciplining, under Sharia the poor are protected and taken care of by the government, the orphans are given rights, everybody is given rights. But criminals are a cancer to society, and in order for a nation to flourish successfully crimes must be eliminated, and drastic actions call for drastic measures. It's contradictory to want a peaceful nation while using a peaceful criminal justice system, simply because in order to eliminate crimes you have to be forceful. Please tell me who on Earth would commit murder knowing he will be killed in return, or steal when he will lose a hand??

It is, and thanks for mentioning this. I forgot about it, but thanks for bringing it to my attention.

In fact, witchcraft in general is becoming a massive problem here in the UK as well now with abuse cases, as Christian African immigrants bring their customs to the UK where they're not seen as acceptable or tolerated. Remember the murders of the Ivorian girl Victoria Climbié or Kristy Bamu? They abuse them because they believe that these people are witches and are driving out evil spirits. This isn't just a couple of cases going on either, but it seems to be a definite problem within the black African communities in the UK.

No, you're wrong. I didn't discount Africa and the Caribbean. I said that these territories have serious problems with Christian, religiously-inspired homophobia (oh, and witchcraft - I forgot about the Climbié case), in quite a lot of cases, immigrants to the UK from these countries bring their homophobia with them. I could list endless Christian countries where gays are treated abominably due to their sexual orientation, but you won't hear much about that from the left because it means criticising brown/black people and, as we all know, these groups are officially above criticism.

The numbers of barbaric acts can be mapped to the level of education within each geographical area. The less educated a region is, the more likely they are to take religious text literally and act on such texts.

This doesn't explain Islamist terrorism in the West although I'll agree with you in that a lot of the barbaric acts are committed by people with poor education. That said, that doesn't excuse people like David Bahati, the Ugandan MP, who is quite a wealthy man and was educated in several UK universities. You'd expect people who have spent time in the West to act as enlightened voices and perhaps drag their people away from Christian religious insanity, yet he is the one most fanning the flames. They have no excuse.

and the fact that we have 26 (CoE) bishops sitting in the House of Commons.

Bloody hell, are these bishops all elected MPs now?

I'd be very happy to vote for a Muslim politician if he a) wore his religion lightly, like Farage does and b) I agreed with his policies. We have Muslim candidates in UKIP, and I'd happily vote for them. If Farage went all loopy and George Hargreaves on the party, I'd be out of there like a shot, believe me.

Okay, but is it a good idea to have a god who allows his subjects to kill in self defense?

That is the nature of mammals. All mammals will take active steps to preserve their lives. Primates are particularly nasty in that regard and that includes our species. Killing in self defense is a necessary action for survival. Any mammalian subspecies that is genetically programmed to be pacifist is either extinct or shortly will be extinct. If you insist on attributing this to a deity, then have it your way. God ordained that man can kill to defend himself. That is the way it is.

ruveyn