Islam - What's your view on it?

[mustafur]

I'm surprised considering the area he wasn't killed for it, his relation to the power of the country(if you call Palestine one) though probably saved him.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I'm surprised considering the area he wasn't killed for it, his relation to the power of the country(if you call Palestine one) though probably saved him.

Sounds like he left home before he converted though. Poor bugger probably didn't realize when he headed for Edmonton that they only have two seasons there. Winter and July.

 

[FoRiZon]

Hamas isn't ISIS though. Didn't see anywhere else it would fit. It's not like honour killings are rare in Islam though.

See the spoilered part of my post.....

 

[novcze]

no better thread to post it, but this kid is hilarious, too bad Singapore doesn't give a toss about free speech and apparently have no sense of humor either. #FreeAmos

 

[GBO Possum]

Some of us might think that responding to the sight of a couple of men kissing by trotting out an assault weapon and killing/injuring over 100 people is just a little tiny bit of an over-reaction.

However, what are assault weapons for if not for opportunities like this. This is America after all, where pretty much everyone is entitled to own an assault weapon, and this guy was an American taught via texts such as these - https://islamqa.info/en/38622

"The Sahaabah were unanimously agreed on the execution of homosexuals, but they differed as to how they were to be executed. Some of them were of the view that they should be burned with fire, which was the view of ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) and also of Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him), as we shall see below. And some of them thought that they should be thrown down from a high place then have stones thrown at them. This was the view of Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him).

Some of them thought that they should be stoned to death, which was narrated from both ‘Ali and Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with them)."​

No mention of assault weapons, however, we are in the 21st century now!

 

[TenEightyOne]

Some of us might think that responding to the sight of a couple of men kissing by trotting out an assault weapon and killing/injuring over 100 people is just a little tiny bit of an over-reaction.

However, what are assault weapons for if not for opportunities like this. This is America after all, where pretty much everyone is entitled to own an assault weapon, and this guy was an American taught via texts such as these - https://islamqa.info/en/38622

"The Sahaabah were unanimously agreed on the execution of homosexuals, but they differed as to how they were to be executed. Some of them were of the view that they should be burned with fire, which was the view of ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) and also of Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him), as we shall see below. And some of them thought that they should be thrown down from a high place then have stones thrown at them. This was the view of Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him).

Some of them thought that they should be stoned to death, which was narrated from both ‘Ali and Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with them)."​

No mention of assault weapons, however, we are in the 21st century now!

But that's hadithic, not quranic. Christianity's god also threw stones onto Sodom, then burned them with fire, then threw the buildings down upon them. In both religions in modern times there are many who don't take that story as having a literal teaching message. For many of us that's how we tell the difference between a religious nutter and a normal religious person. Religious literalists are nutters, fact.

 

[mustafur]

But that's hadithic, not quranic. Christianity's god also threw stones onto Sodom, then burned them with fire, then threw the buildings down upon them. In both religions in modern times there are many who don't take that story as having a literal teaching message. For many of us that's how we tell the difference between a religious nutter and a normal religious person. Religious literalists are nutters, fact.

The big issue is the Bibles insane parts are old testament and the Qurans are new testament.
Taking any book like this from a literal as it says way, will basically make you ISIS ideology wise.

 

[TenEightyOne]

The big issue is the Bibles insane parts are old testament and the Qurans are new testament.

That's academic, they're both made up and both over a thousand years old.

 

[Dennisch]

That's academic, they're both made up and both over a thousand years old.

And to think that there are much better made up stories.

 

[Ibonibo]

And to think that there are much better made up stories.

Hail hydra

/I take my coat

 

[GBO Possum]

But that's hadithic, not quranic. Christianity's god also threw stones onto Sodom, then burned them with fire, then threw the buildings down upon them. In both religions in modern times there are many who don't take that story as having a literal teaching message. For many of us that's how we tell the difference between a religious nutter and a normal religious person. Religious literalists are nutters, fact.

"Hadith are second only to the Quran in developing Islamic jurisprudence" according to Wikipedia, and people (no doubt meaning straight male people) trained in Islamic Jurisprudence are appropriately known as "Fuqaha". A pretty scary foundation for law.

And your point about Christianity having equally evil roots is not lost on me. The Christian excuse is that in practice, fewer Christians actually kill gay people for being gay. They just took over an entire major political party in the US and persecute gays (and women) more subtly. The hate is still there, it's just delivered in a more sneaky vehicle.

 

[TenEightyOne]

"Hadith are second only to the Quran in developing Islamic jurisprudence" according to Wikipedia

True, but that's not to say that all Muslims accept all hadiths - those jurisprudent interpretations lead to some of the greatest divisions between different followers of the religion. It's almost like the differing translations of the bibble or the different teachings of churches (think Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Anglicans). They all produce teachings that lead to interpretation of the sacred texts but don't necessarily all teach the same conclusions or methods.

 

[Lucas]

Religious literalists are nutters, fact.

That's an interesting way of following your religion. If God appeared before you and ordered you to throw rocks at people and burn them, what would you do?

Every religious person is nuts, some just follow their religion better.

 

[Brett]

Hail hydra

/I take my coat

 

[kennylmao]

True, but that's not to say that all Muslims accept all hadiths - those jurisprudent interpretations lead to some of the greatest divisions between different followers of the religion. It's almost like the differing translations of the bibble or the different teachings of churches (think Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Anglicans). They all produce teachings that lead to interpretation of the sacred texts but don't necessarily all teach the same conclusions or methods.

Honestly, you could've saved your time and effort with a simple #notall

 

[TenEightyOne]

Honestly, you could've saved your time and effort with a simple #notall

But that tweet is uninformed, blind bollocks. Why would anyone choose that as an answer to a serious point?

 

[Spurgy 777]

But that tweet is uninformed, blind bollocks. Why would anyone choose that as an answer to a serious point?

Well if you believe the recent poll that said 52% of British Muslims think homosexuality should be illegal, the actual numbers aren't much better.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...se-of-belonging-poll-homosexuality-sharia-law

 

[TenEightyOne]

Well if you believe the recent poll that said 52% of British Muslims think homosexuality should be illegal, the actual numbers aren't much better.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...se-of-belonging-poll-homosexuality-sharia-law

Before even digging into that article... you think 52% is the same as 99%? What makes you think that there aren't a similarly significant number of other British people who feel the same way?

 

[Spurgy 777]

Before even digging into that article... you think 52% is the same as 99%? What makes you think that there aren't a similarly significant number of other British people who feel the same way?

Well the same article says that only 5% of the rest of the population think homosexuality should be illegal, which is why I said the actual numbers aren't much better because, well 52% compared to 5% is still terrible.

 

[mustafur]

Before even digging into that article... you think 52% is the same as 99%? What makes you think that there aren't a similarly significant number of other British people who feel the same way?

I don't know where he got his statistics from but does thinking being a Homosexual should be illegal be the same as being an homophobe.

I mean I'm sure there is a section that are homophobic but don't think it should be illegal.

 

[Spurgy 777]

I don't know where he got his statistics from but does thinking being a Homosexual should be illegal be the same as being an homophobe.

I mean I'm sure there is a section that are homophobic but don't think it should be illegal.

I forgot to mention that, I would assume that the % who are homophobic is probably higher than the % who think homosexuality should be illegal and this is a poll on British Muslims who are probably less homophobic than the average Muslim worldwide. Both of those if true would increase the worldwide % of homophobic Muslims (although probably not up to 97-99%).

 

[mustafur]

I forgot to mention that, I would assume that the % who are homophobic is probably higher than the % who think homosexuality should be illegal and this is a poll on British Muslims who are probably less homophobic than the average Muslim worldwide. Both of those if true would increase the worldwide % of homophobic Muslims (although probably not up to 97-99%).

In that same link it said 18% say being a Homosexual should be legal, so I guess you could say 82% are Homophobic from that but it's hard to say.

 

[kennylmao]

But that tweet is uninformed, blind bollocks. Why would anyone choose that as an answer to a serious point?

Did you even click on it?

 

[stonesfan129]

Ehh just another opinion/view. But I'm pretty sure Jesus said he is the only way to heaven. Jesus was the one who performed miracles. Just saying.

 

[mustafur]

What ISIS looks like in diplomatic form, Hizb_ut-Tahrir.



Whilst the interviewer's impatience gets tiresome, the lack of any condemnation of IS activity, yet obvious Double standard when it comes to his view on Assad(because Assad is a Shia) makes his points questionable, not to mention believing the the exact same philosophy as ISIS when it comes to political structure under a Caliphate makes this pretty cringe worthy to watch.

I'm sure he would have nothing to say when it comes to Yemen though, because the Shia majority are obviously backwards in their support for a ''Shia'' leader.

 

[McLaren]

Hoping this is satire and not a real issue, but I thought the ISIS folks were not considered true Muslims by the majority of the Muslim followers. Yet, an anti-Islamophobia group believes saying "**** ISIS" incites violence against Muslims. Wouldn't Muslims share that same sentiment against ISIS?

http://www.breitbart.com/london/201...tement/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

Police have charged Tommy Robinson, a PEGIDA UK organiser, with “inciting racial hatred against Muslims” after he was pictured with a flag with “*** ISIS” written on it, his lawyer has claimed.

The lawyer alleged in a statement that an application for a football banning order against Mr. Robinson was “brought on the basis of a harassment campaign” linked to his “high social media profile, and is associated with Pegida UK” and amounted to an attack on his “free speech”.

Muslim Engagement and Development (MEND), an “anti-Islamophobia” think tank with Islamist sympathies, said on Twitter that Mr. Robinson was “inciting hate” by mocking the genocidal terrorist group.

Can't really quote the rest of the article as it does refer to the censored word a couple times, so this article may be nsfw.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Wouldn't Muslims share that same sentiment against ISIS?

Yes, but there has been an increase in discrimination after the Brexit vote. There's plenty of anecdotal reports on social media about "voting immigrants out". If that's true, then I don't think that the impact can be overlooked.

 

[FoRiZon]

Hoping this is satire and not a real issue, but I thought the ISIS folks were not considered true Muslims by the majority of the Muslim followers. Yet, an anti-Islamophobia group believes saying "**** ISIS" incites violence against Muslims. Wouldn't Muslims share that same sentiment against ISIS?

http://www.breitbart.com/london/201...tement/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

Can't really quote the rest of the article as it does refer to the censored word a couple times, so this article may be nsfw.

Those group probably affectionate to moslem but didnt know much better. Not going to play true Scotsman here but moderate moslems (which take large part of the community as expected) condems ISIS and wants them to be all destroyed, rejecting their "Muslim" moniker.

Which also add that ISIS screws up Moslem area more than the non ones. They basically didnt want to prolong the suffering.

Example: You may heard ISIS attacks in Belgium but probably no one heard ones in Jordan, Bangladesh, etc.
https://news.vice.com/topic/isis

Also Eid Mubarak is in 4th of July unless more info stated.

 

[mustafur]

All ideas should be open to criticism. That is the beauty of Free speech.

 

[Dennisch]

Example: You may heard ISIS attacks in Belgium but probably no one heard ones in Jordan, Bangladesh, etc.

Why do people think that the West doesn't report about those attacks? It's plastered all over the news here. Even if it happens in some tiny village in what ever country, our news shows it.