Bible Justice, Mmmmmmmmmmm-mm!

[Metal Vendetta]

Only somebody who would be seen as symbolic of perfection. It's hardly racial purity to have one job in the entire country like that.

No dogs, no blacks, no Irish.

Which isn't how it's intended at all. There's a fair chance that in that society it would have been as much a hygiene thing as much as anything else/

A hygeine thing that restricts the movements of women, sets them apart from men, and stems from fear of a natural bodily function (something religion has done again and again, there's a reason why it's known as "the curse".

Neither of which is something I was advocating. Firstly, however you take it, that commandment doesn't refer to "gay men", but to engaging in a particular activity. Secondly, the rule would appear to only apply to the community of Israel, somebody who is supposedly committed to serving God but, if the "pagan practice" interpretation is correct is moonlighting with another god. I can at least understand it in that context. As for the severity thing, I don't consider any one type of sin to be more severe than another.

Strangely I do, killing is a bit more severe than telling your dad to **** off. And you're still trying to defend the notion that it's okay to kill people who practise sodomy and worship another god, but pretend to worship your god. Which is precisely why Impy, myself and others consider religious people so frightening.

So it's okay to be gay as long as you're celibate? Of course, why didn't we think of that before?

Well, why not?

I cann't believe you're seriously asking that question. Do you know anything about what people are actually like, or do you totally live in a world of make-believe?

You should see the ****ing kids who hang around my garden.

A product of a culture that's radically different to the one in which that law was given. In that society children were much more respectful of their parents and much less likely to have the opportunity to pursue such a lifestyle.

You think that in the times of the bible everyone lived an idyllic lifestyle, children abstained from alcohol until they were eighteen, went to school and agreed with everything their parents said? I think this law was passed to deal with precisely the sort of kids who hang around my estate.

So if your son drinks too much, kill him? Nice.

Twist what I said until it fits your preconceptions? Nice.

Your interpretation was extremely ropey, I was just cutting to the chase. Bottom line, if your son drinks too much, you can drag him to court and have him sentenced to death. Not how I want things run in my town. Again, I'd have been executed a few times now, probably several times a week when I was at university.

Um, sorry, but I missed that. I've dealt with the genocide bit, but precisely where were you claiming that the Bible condones murder or incest?

You haven't really dealt with the genocide bit at all, you've said "yeah, but, no but, yeah but, no but" How about Lot ****ing his two daughters? The people of Sodom get their city destroyed (in an area known for its geological instability, curiously enough) for sodomy, but Lot ****s both his daughters and gives rise to two tribes. Not once does the Bible mention that the whole ****ing your daughters thing is sick. It presents it as the most natural thing in the world and also shifts most of the blame onto the girls. It's nasty, sexist, incestual ****, and there's no defending it, though I'm sure you'll say that God made a special compensation in his case or something equally banal and meaningless.

After the flood, God said that He wouldn't do the same kind of thing again, though the way it's described gives the impression that they were as close to that level of nastiness as their technology allowed.

It's convenient that God said he'd never send a flood or anything to kill people again. I remember a tsunami not long back. And the level of nastiness is relative, but I doubt it was anything like as bad as, say, the past 2,000 years.

Well, if you're going to say that the Bible is lying about why God chose somebody for a particular task, you might as well forget the idea of any kind of discussion about what the God of the Bible is like. If you look at any example of a Biblical hero, you can always spot flaws and say "God could have chosen or created someone better suited for the task". That's probably the whole point, actually.

What, that an all-powerful and all-knowing God makes mistakes? Doesn't that disprove the whole point?

In the case of genocide, the Bible portrays the conquest of the promised land as being God's judgement on the people living there for their sins.

And not, for example, the history of a people living in the middle east who conquered everyone else and then used 'God' to justify it?

That's not what the Bible portrays.

Since when? You think the Midianites slaughtered themselves? You think the other tribes abandoned their gods and worshipped the Israelites' war god because they wanted to, or because the Israelites were giving away free cakes that week?

No. War. Slash, stab, murder, conquer, worship. Old Testament stuff.

And yes, the idea is unpalatable to a 21st Century Western Worldview, and no I don't completely get it, although many of the practices these religions were into were truly truly evil.

Source please? All I can find in the Bible is that they worshipped Ba'al and some of their women slept with Israelite men. Hardly "truly truly evil" by any standards.

You missed the bits about worship of Molech involving child sacrifice, then? These were not nice fluffy religions.

Neither were the followers of Jehovah. They slaughtered their neighbours and their neighbours' children on the whim of their god. I mean, they are supposed to be the good guys in all this, right? The way you seem to see it is that they're only good because they're the least evil. Which ain't good, by any stretch.

In the case of incest, well I guess you're referring to Abraham being married to his half-sister Sarah. They were already married before God called Abraham, so it's a case of God taking a situation that is not good, but turning that situation into something that is good.

Retcon. The dude who shagged his sister got to be leader of the tribe. He said later, 'God' did it.

Nice retcon of yours there. Pity it doesn't work. Abraham left his tribe (actually city) with his wife at which point God hadn't called him to anything. He never actually obtained a tribe.

Whatever. Invented monotheism, essentially. The father of Judaism, Christianity and Islam ****ed his sister.

Well, how about the example of Onan, who had a wank and was then killed by God? On that reasoning I should have been killed by God about 4 times a day, on average, for the past 15 years.

Somebody really hasn't read the passage he's talking about. Because if you had, you'd know that it says nothing of the sort.

Onan, first page:

One Jewish interpretation is that Onan was deserving of the death penalty solely because he sinned by spilling his seed (see Babylonian Talmud tractate Niddah 13a). The narrative is cited as a reason for the ban on both masturbation and coitus interruptus.

Medieval Catholic authors also understood the activities of God in this story as a condemnation of masturbation and contraception. This interpretation was held by important figures in the early Church, such as St. Jerome who makes explicit reference to Onan's sexual act.

Goes on to say that the act punishable by death is now generally regarded to be coitus interruptus, rather than masturbation, though again, I've been guilty of this one a few (hundred) times as well. Though it didn't always fall on the ground. Point being, your God murdered someone because of it. What a pleasant and understanding God he is. And inconsistent.

I actually said that we think we've moved on. Society is very different to what it was then. What worked then wouldn't work now. That doesn't necessarily mean that our way of life or our worldview is any better.

I don't know about your worlddview, but I think I'm considerably better informed than, say, a biblical farmer. And if you paid more attention to the world around you instead of trying to justify why intolerance is okay when God does it or listening to the voice in your head labelled "God", maybe you would be too.

You get as much confusion over the Koran - which claims to be God doing just that. Any substantial revelation given within history will inevitably have aspects which are not so obvious when related to a different culture in a different time to that in which the original revelation was given.

As you'll have seen from my discussions with Yaya, I don't consider the Koran to be the authentic word of God either. I think that both books are fascinating as cultural artifacts, I don't think they're particularly useful lifestyle guides and I certainly wouldn't want either of them as the basis for a legal system for precisely the reason you give above. They are of that time, and that culture. They're anachronous. They're not needed any more.

I make a fair bit of effort to understand the historical and cultural context of the Bible. But taking the Bible's commentary of itself as an interpretation of those parts does not equate to picking and choosing the bits I like. And my point about genocide is that the only passages which talk about genocide in a positive light are very specific - this is divine judgement on this particular group of people. There is no remit within the text (especially when looked at in the historical context) for genocide outside the context of peoples who no longer exist. And even then there was provision for people from those groups to be saved from it.

No? You don't think that it allows for those who follow God's word to slaughter those who don't? You don't think it might encourage people to mistrust those who follow different religions? Hell, above you're advocating celibacy for homosexuals - essentially you say they should curtail their freedoms for fear of upsetting your God's predilictions. It's already made you into a bigot, how much further before you decide it's time to take the Lord's work into your own hands?

[Yaya]

I don't think they're particularly useful lifestyle guides and I certainly wouldn't want either of them as the basis for a legal system for precisely the reason you give above. They are of that time, and that culture. They're anachronous.

And yet, despite your belief, half the world chooses to fall in one of these two religions.

Hate to break this to you, but they are of this time, of this culture. The fact that you disagree with them does not make them obsolete.

Nobody is forced to be Christian or Muslim in this world. They simply choose to be these things.

If something is obsolete, then it should fall by the wayside. That would be the natural evolutionary tendency of something that is obsolete and not forced on others.

Yet here we are, with billions of people, with many nations, claiming Islam and Christianity as their own belief.

I find Islam to be highly practical. I have goals in life, and Islam has not stymied my achieving them in any way.

[Kaylee]

I don't think they're particularly useful lifestyle guides and I certainly wouldn't want either of them as the basis for a legal system for precisely the reason you give above. They are of that time, and that culture. They're anachronous.

Nobody is forced to be Christian or Muslim in this world. They simply choose to be these things.

That is not true. Many people are forced to go along with the teachings of religions- 'honor' killings are a good example.

[Yaya]

I don't think they're particularly useful lifestyle guides and I certainly wouldn't want either of them as the basis for a legal system for precisely the reason you give above. They are of that time, and that culture. They're anachronous.

Nobody is forced to be Christian or Muslim in this world. They simply choose to be these things.

That is not true. Many people are forced to go along with the teachings of religions- 'honor' killings are a good example.

Honor killings are not a part of Islam, and as far as I know, not of Christianity either.

[Kaylee]

Nobody is forced to be Christian or Muslim in this world. They simply choose to be these things.

That is not true. Many people are forced to go along with the teachings of religions- 'honor' killings are a good example.

Honor killings are not a part of Islam, and as far as I know, not of Christianity either.

I never said they were part of the religion, but they are used to force people to go along with religion.

[Metal Vendetta]

Nobody is forced to be Christian or Muslim in this world. They simply choose to be these things.

There's no choice at all if you happen to be born into a religious family in a religious society. The Jesuits used to say "Give us the boy for the first seven years of his life, and we will give you the man." If you raise a person within a religion, then the chances of them leaving are incredibly slim as it means going against everything their families, friends and teachers believe in. It's not being forced to be religious, it's just that there simply isn't any alternative. You think atheists are tolerated in Muslim countries? You don't think that they just get the **** beaten out of them (if they're lucky)? Isn't blasphemy still a capital offence in most Muslim countries? So if you disagree with the Koran or the religious authorities, you get killed? WHERE'S THE ***ING CHOICE THERE?

Don't tell me that it's all about choice because I've known people who've had to leave their families and marriages because they realised they didn't believe in God any more and were judged apostate by their community. That's not a choice, that's blackmail, bullying and ostracision. The way you talk about your religion as if it was all sweetness and light quite honestly staggers me. Are you really so stubborn and/or blind to think that this sort of thing doesn't happen and that everyone who follows a religion thinks it's the best thing since sliced bread? Why don't you see this?

[Yaya]

You think atheists are tolerated in Muslim countries? You don't think that they just get the **** beaten out of them (if they're lucky)? Isn't blasphemy still a capital offence in most Muslim countries? So if you disagree with the Koran or the religious authorities, you get killed? WHERE'S THE ***ING CHOICE THERE?

Not sure what version of Islam you are referring to, but you will not find anywhere in the Koran or the Hadith the forcing of one to become Muslim with death as the alternative. This is a fallacy that even my own high school text taught about Islam, that it was "spread by the sword". On the contrary, the Koran states "There is no compulsion in religion". During the times of the Prophet (PBUH) Christians and Jews were allowed to practice their religion, provided they paid a protection tax to the Muslim army for their defense against outside enemies. Other than that tax, there were no demands or threats placed on the heads of those who chose to believe otherwise. In Spain, for example, Jews used to defend the country when the Muslim armies were out in battle when Spain was under Muslim rule.

Yes, once upon a time, Jews and Muslims lived together. You want to see tolerance, there is tolerance.

How can one be forced to believe against what their heart inclines to? It can't be done.

Don't tell me that it's all about choice because I've known people who've had to leave their families and marriages because they realised they didn't believe in God any more and were judged apostate by their community. That's not a choice, that's blackmail, bullying and ostracision.

The choices we make MV are not always easy ones. Yet we still choose. I choose to be a Muslim in a land where I am called "terrorist", "Nazi", etc. daily. If my wife wears the head scarf, insults are tossed her way everyday. I see on the news the Patriot Act in effect, how a Muslim can so easily be detained without rights, without a trial, without a phone call. Still, I choose to be Muslim, and openly so.

I have a choice to believe what I will, and I make it, regardless of what the repurcussions might be.

To believe that you will live in a world of utter bliss, of rationaility, free of biases and prejudices will never happen. If its not religion, its the color of ones skin. If its not that, its ones nation. If its not that, its one's sex. And so on.

[Dead Head]

Nobody is forced to be Christian or Muslim in this world. They simply choose to be these things.

There's no choice at all if you happen to be born into a religious family in a religious society. The Jesuits used to say "Give us the boy for the first seven years of his life, and we will give you the man." If you raise a person within a religion, then the chances of them leaving are incredibly slim as it means going against everything their families, friends and teachers believe in. It's not being forced to be religious, it's just that there simply isn't any alternative. You think atheists are tolerated in Muslim countries? You don't think that they just get the **** beaten out of them (if they're lucky)? Isn't blasphemy still a capital offence in most Muslim countries? So if you disagree with the Koran or the religious authorities, you get killed? WHERE'S THE ***ING CHOICE THERE?

Don't tell me that it's all about choice because I've known people who've had to leave their families and marriages because they realised they didn't believe in God any more and were judged apostate by their community. That's not a choice, that's blackmail, bullying and ostracision. The way you talk about your religion as if it was all sweetness and light quite honestly staggers me. Are you really so stubborn and/or blind to think that this sort of thing doesn't happen and that everyone who follows a religion thinks it's the best thing since sliced bread? Why don't you see this?

Quoted for truth, Metal Vendetta. Bravo.

[Metal Vendetta]

Not sure what version of Islam you are referring to, but you will not find anywhere in the Koran or the Hadith the forcing of one to become Muslim with death as the alternative.

Nice dodge. I'm not talking about what it says in the Koran. I'm talking about Islam as practised in the real world. In the real world's most powerful Islamic country, blasphemy - such as questioning the Koran or referring to Mohammed in a derogatory manner - carries the death penalty. In a society where one can't even question religion, how long do you think a person would last if they said that they believed the whole thing was a load of tosh?

And remember, I'm talking about the practice of Islam in the real world. I'm not talking about what Mohammed said, or what his intentions were, so don't come back with "that's not what it says in the Koran". That's how it is. That's what Muslims do. That's how they feel about it. They may be tolerant of Christians, and even Jews at a stretch, because they all believe in the same Flying Spaghetti Monster in the long run, but atheists are not tolerated.

This is a fallacy that even my own high school text taught about Islam, that it was "spread by the sword".

Mmmm. Like how I never mentioned that anywhere in my post. Again, nice dodge.

How can one be forced to believe against what their heart inclines to? It can't be done.

No it can't. But you can threaten, beat or kill them if they talk about it. Where's the choice?

Don't tell me that it's all about choice because I've known people who've had to leave their families and marriages because they realised they didn't believe in God any more and were judged apostate by their community. That's not a choice, that's blackmail, bullying and ostracision.

The choices we make MV are not always easy ones. Yet we still choose. I choose to be a Muslim in a land where I am called "terrorist", "Nazi", etc. daily. If my wife wears the head scarf, insults are tossed her way everyday. I see on the news the Patriot Act in effect, how a Muslim can so easily be detained without rights, without a trial, without a phone call. Still, I choose to be Muslim, and openly so.

Don't you live in the free west though? I doubt any child growing up in Pakistan who turns to his parents saying "I want to be a Jew!" will have the same freedom of choice as you have.

[Yaya]

And remember, I'm talking about the practice of Islam in the real world. I'm not talking about what Mohammed said, or what his intentions were, so don't come back with "that's not what it says in the Koran". That's how it is. That's what Muslims do. That's how they feel about it.

That's what Muslims do now.

You are 100%, absolutely, positively right.

You might be surprised, MV, to believe I feel that way too.

If you are talking about the Muslims of today, you will not find me in disagreement with you. Though I am Muslim myself, I place no greater blame for the poor state of affairs of the Muslims today then on us Muslims.

I bash the Muslims of today left and right for a reason. Many hate it, but it has to be done. Stop blaming the Jews. Stop blaming the West. If a Muslim actually lived Islam, he would point the finger at himself for the major shortcomings in both the knowledge and practice of Islam that he has today and correct them.

Calling oneself a Muslim does not free one from the responsibilities of being a civil, decent, honest human being. You don't get to paradise on a freakin name. I am Muslim and believe it to be truth. But you have to live it. You can't go around not practicing what you preach.

At the same time, however, it is not the civil, honest decent thing to do to take advantage of a people in turmoil by stealing their oil resources in the name of freedom, for example. Blame falls squarely there as well.

[Dead Head]

Not sure what version of Islam you are referring to, but you will not find anywhere in the Koran or the Hadith the forcing of one to become Muslim with death as the alternative.

More of your LIES. The Muslim Holy texts contain many edicts exhorting Muslims to subdue and slay non-Muslims/'unbelievers' who reject Islam.

This is a fallacy that even my own high school text taught about Islam, that it was "spread by the sword".

OF COURSE Islam WAS and IS spread by the sword. Muhammad conducted very many offensive wars (some even led by the powermongering warlord himself) with neighboring tribes and states. Islam's very origins are rooted in aggressive violence and bloody war. There are no two ways about that. Muslims find paltry excuse after lame excuse to explain away the misdeeds of their 'exemplary' prophet, and the violent/unjust commandments that litter the Quran.

On the contrary, the Koran states "There is no compulsion in religion".

*BULLSH1T ALERT* You conveniently fail to mention, as apologists are known to do, is that that early Koran verse is made invalid and is overridden by the later verses that call for "Struggle against the unbelievers and hypocrites and be harsh with them", amongst other deadly, aggressive, and violent intents towards unbelievers. Not only that, but the Muhammad 'handily' changed his tune later on when Islam was getting much more militarily powerful and he started spouting increasingly intolerant guff like: "Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme!"

During the times of the Prophet (PBUH) Christians and Jews were allowed to practice their religion, provided they paid a protection tax to the Muslim army for their defense against outside enemies.

Wow. You really are in full-on truth-twisting deluded apologist mode!

The choice for conquered non-believers under the boot of Islam was (and IS, because the Quran is still utterly valid and true for all time) either to A) convert to Islam and enjoy 'tolerance' and 'equality' that it brings, or B) don't convert but exist as a severely restricted second-class unbeliever paying the 'non-Muslim tax' to the benefit of the Muslims, with very little if any rights compared to a Muslim, or C) be murdered for rejecting Islam and second-class dirt status.

Other than that tax, there were no demands or threats placed on the heads of those who chose to believe otherwise.

Oh... except the conditions and restrictions (legal and otherwise) designed to oppress and humiliate non-Muslims. Yeah, those little details are easy to forget (or to twist) alright...

How can one be forced to believe against what their heart inclines to? It can't be done.

That's where Islam's sword comes in. Just like the black slaves who were stolen away to the Americas, oppression is quite successful in forcing subsequent generations to believe what the oppressors want the oppressed to believe. The first generation of people will likely, in their hearts, not believe in the force-fed religion, but by jiminey, it works wonders when you look at the offspring a few generations down. In a general sense, it shows just how replaceable one set of dumb religious beliefs is with another. 'On pain of death' works wonders.

I choose to be a Muslim in a land where I am called "terrorist", "Nazi", etc. daily.

That doesn't sound nice at all. On the other hand, you freely subscribe to a religion, Islam, which is most definitely immoderate, intolerant and violent. You, as an individual, may be a happy-with-homosexuals- happy-with-apostates-happy-with-unbelieving-men -marrying-muslim-women -happy-amongst-many-other-things total pacifist, but that doesn't change the many ugly tenets that are a vital and living part of Islam.

There should be no taboo in criticizing religion, but they all too commonly get utterly unfounded protection from criticism. Islam is a particularly nasty, intolerant and virulent faith. All the "be kind to your elders", "fast", and "give to charity"-type good stuff can't make up for the multitude of eternal hate and injustice spewing from the Quran and Ahadith.

The sooner mankind unsubscribes from religions, especially ones like Islam, the better.

If my wife wears the head scarf, insults are tossed her way everyday.

Not nice, and I don't think she should be provoked like that (obviously the Islamic covering makes her easily identifiable as a Muslim). On another point, she is a bigger fool than you (a man) for remaining to be a Muslim, though.

I see on the news the Patriot Act in effect, how a Muslim can so easily be detained without rights, without a trial, without a phone call. Still, I choose to be Muslim, and openly so.

Restricted rights for the minority? Jeeee... that has quite the Islamic tinge to it!

Still, I choose to be Muslim, and openly so.

You choose to remain blind, and a craven apologist if you don't refute the wicked calls to the faithful within your holy books.

If its not religion, its the color of ones skin. If its not that, its ones nation. If its not that, its one's sex. And so on.

Nice sidestepping. You're avoiding that religion is indeed a powerful catalyst and divinely-ordained legitimizer for prejudice. Eliminating such a malevolent enabler like religion and human nature would be much the better for it.

[Yaya]

Not sure what version of Islam you are referring to, but you will not find anywhere in the Koran or the Hadith the forcing of one to become Muslim with death as the alternative.

More of your LIES. The Muslim Holy texts contain many edicts exhorting Muslims to subdue and slay non-Muslims/'unbelievers' who reject Islam.

This is a fallacy that even my own high school text taught about Islam, that it was "spread by the sword".

OF COURSE Islam WAS and IS spread by the sword. Muhammad conducted very many offensive wars (some even led by the powermongering warlord himself) with neighboring tribes and states. Islam's very origins are rooted in aggressive violence and bloody war. There are no two ways about that. Muslims find paltry excuse after lame excuse to explain away the misdeeds of their 'exemplary' prophet, and the violent/unjust commandments that litter the Quran.

On the contrary, the Koran states "There is no compulsion in religion".

*BULLSH1T ALERT* You conveniently fail to mention, as apologists are known to do, is that that early Koran verse is made invalid and is overridden by the later verses that call for "Struggle against the unbelievers and hypocrites and be harsh with them", amongst other deadly, aggressive, and violent intents towards unbelievers. Not only that, but the Muhammad 'handily' changed his tune later on when Islam was getting much more militarily powerful and he started spouting increasingly intolerant guff like: "Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme!"

During the times of the Prophet (PBUH) Christians and Jews were allowed to practice their religion, provided they paid a protection tax to the Muslim army for their defense against outside enemies.

Wow. You really are in full-on truth-twisting deluded apologist mode!

The choice for conquered non-believers under the boot of Islam was (and IS, because the Quran is still utterly valid and true for all time) either to A) convert to Islam and enjoy 'tolerance' and 'equality' that it brings, or B) don't convert but exist as a severely restricted second-class unbeliever paying the 'non-Muslim tax' to the benefit of the Muslims, with very little if any rights compared to a Muslim, or C) be murdered for rejecting Islam and second-class dirt status.

Other than that tax, there were no demands or threats placed on the heads of those who chose to believe otherwise.

Oh... except the conditions and restrictions (legal and otherwise) designed to oppress and humiliate non-Muslims. Yeah, those little details are easy to forget (or to twist) alright...

How can one be forced to believe against what their heart inclines to? It can't be done.

That's where Islam's sword comes in. Just like the black slaves who were stolen away to the Americas, oppression is quite successful in forcing subsequent generations to believe what the oppressors want the oppressed to believe. The first generation of people will likely, in their hearts, not believe in the force-fed religion, but by jiminey, it works wonders when you look at the offspring a few generations down. In a general sense, it shows just how replaceable one set of dumb religious beliefs is with another. 'On pain of death' works wonders.

I choose to be a Muslim in a land where I am called "terrorist", "Nazi", etc. daily.

That doesn't sound nice at all. On the other hand, you freely subscribe to a religion, Islam, which is most definitely immoderate, intolerant and violent. You, as an individual, may be a happy-with-homosexuals- happy-with-apostates-happy-with-unbelieving-men -marrying-muslim-women -happy-amongst-many-other-things total pacifist, but that doesn't change the many ugly tenets that are a vital and living part of Islam.

There should be no taboo in criticizing religion, but they all too commonly get utterly unfounded protection from criticism. Islam is a particularly nasty, intolerant and virulent faith. All the "be kind to your elders", "fast", and "give to charity"-type good stuff can't make up for the multitude of eternal hate and injustice spewing from the Quran and Ahadith.

The sooner mankind unsubscribes from religions, especially ones like Islam, the better.

If my wife wears the head scarf, insults are tossed her way everyday.

Not nice, and I don't think she should be provoked like that (obviously the Islamic covering makes her easily identifiable as a Muslim). On another point, she is a bigger fool than you (a man) for remaining to be a Muslim, though.

I see on the news the Patriot Act in effect, how a Muslim can so easily be detained without rights, without a trial, without a phone call. Still, I choose to be Muslim, and openly so.

Restricted rights for the minority? Jeeee... that has quite the Islamic tinge to it!

Still, I choose to be Muslim, and openly so.

You choose to remain blind, and a craven apologist if you don't refute the wicked calls to the faithful within your holy books.

If its not religion, its the color of ones skin. If its not that, its ones nation. If its not that, its one's sex. And so on.

Nice sidestepping. You're avoiding that religion is indeed a powerful catalyst and divinely-ordained legitimizer for prejudice. Eliminating such a malevolent enabler like religion and human nature would be much the better for it.

I have studied and practiced Islam for over thirty years. I have lived it.

When you have my level of experience and understanding of my faith, let me know.

Maybe then I might give a rat's ass what you have to say about it.

[Impactor returns 2.0]

right now tho - hes just proved you wrong, so Islam is look poo to me?
Care to fight your side or just say hes wrong because you know better?

Hitler said he was right to kill jews, didnt make him right tho.

[Dead Head]

right now tho - hes just proved you wrong, so Islam is look poo to me?
Care to fight your side or just say hes wrong because you know better?

Yaya's non-response to my specific points is a common tactic amongst the religious who don't wish to show up the nasty elements of their faith.

I have studied and practiced Islam for over thirty years. I have lived it.

When you have my level of experience and understanding of my faith, let me know.

Maybe then I might give a rat's ass what you have to say about it.

Nice sidestepping again. Blah blah blah. Now answer the points in my post or continue looking like a slimey avoider.

[Best First]

I have studied and practiced Islam for over thirty years. I have lived it.

That being the case you should really be equipped to answer his points shouldn't you?

also, the fact you have done somthing for a long time just menas you know a lot about your own perspective on the matter, not that you are correct.

Converesly Dead Head you might want ot be a bit more mature in your approach to questioning Islam, you sem to be being deliberatly provocative of something you must relaise is very personal to Yaya.

And yes i'm aware that's probably a hypocritcal comment, but we can aspire to discuss this in a better manner, even if we disagre strongly.

Niether shouting each other or refusing to acknowledge points makes for a productive debate.

[Impactor returns 2.0]

For myself I will never belive in 'god' or a higher being.

So for myself religions are a way to lead your life by a set of rules - when someone counters lots of fundemental points within a religion Id like to hear a response in regards to those points being made.

I like to try and understand at least what makes different religions tick along - the god bit and the miracles and the magic dont exist to me so its the fundementals that are of great importance to myself.

[Dead Head]

Converesly Dead Head you might want ot be a bit more mature in your approach to questioning Islam, you sem to be being deliberatly provocative of something you must relaise is very personal to Yaya.

I'm not being provocative for the sake of provocation - Islam was forged in violence and bloodshed, and the 'eternal and perfect' holy texts are littered with calls to violence, aggression and expansionist agenda.

I don't believe any religion. Threads on religion are common in this forum. Religion warrants no protection, but a taboo on criticizing them exists none the less. Islam's tenets, being somewhat unknown and hazy by most in the West, get a totally undue benefit of the doubt.

Gender/race/sexuality/disability are rarely if ever targets for legitimate criticism [in the secular West]. On the other hand, religion as a personal choice, is.

And yes i'm aware that's probably a hypocritcal comment, but we can aspire to discuss this in a better manner, even if we disagre strongly.

I'm not pussyfooting, but I'm not baselessly shouting "IZLAM IZ GHEY! lol!!!1" and running away. I have very serious and substantive concerns concerns with religion (Islam and Christianity, being so very widespread and powerful, being the top two of concern) and my concerns (and my voicing thereof) have foundation.

Niether shouting each other or refusing to acknowledge points makes for a productive debate.

I've addressed Yaya's dubious post, point-by-point. I'll be interested to see him do likewise.

[Best First]

Converesly Dead Head you might want ot be a bit more mature in your approach to questioning Islam, you sem to be being deliberatly provocative of something you must relaise is very personal to Yaya.

I'm not being provocative for the sake of provocation - Islam was forged in violence and bloodshed, and the 'eternal and perfect' holy texts are littered with calls to violence, aggression and expansionist agenda.

That may well be true. However firstly I would suggest tyou offer examples rather than just asserting that that’s the case and secondly I don’t see the correlation between the above and and writing things like “******** ALERT” and name calling.

I don't believe any religion. Threads on religion are common in this forum. Religion warrants no protection, but a taboo on criticizing them exists none the less.

er, you have been to Transfans right?

Islam's tenets, being somewhat unknown and hazy by most in the West, get a totally undue benefit of the doubt.

Gender/race/sexuality/disability are rarely if ever targets for legitimate criticism [in the secular West]. On the other hand, religion as a personal choice, is.

That’s nice. Of course I never said anything to contradict any of this so I don’t really know why you are bothering to state this when all I have done is question the manner in which you are asserting such points.

Given that I have enunciated almost identical opinions on this board numerous times

I have very serious and substantive concerns concerns with religion (Islam and Christianity, being so very widespread and powerful, being the top two of concern) and my concerns (and my voicing thereof) have foundation.

Which again has nothing to do with the manner in which you voice them.

I've addressed Yaya's dubious post, point-by-point. I'll be interested to see him do likewise.

Well, you’ll probably have a better chance of that happening if you posted in a manner that was respectful of his right to have a different belief to you, regardless of whether you respect that belief itself (a distinction people often seem to fail to make).

I guess the question is what are you actually hoping to achieve?

[Metal Vendetta]

Dead Head, though I agree with almost all you've posted, I'm going to have to second Besty on this one (not that he needs it, being omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent). You did come across a bit strong and it's not useful for constructive dialogue. I realise this is definitely a case of the even-blacker-than-Besty's-pot pot calling the kettle black but I think I'm just annoyed that you upset Yaya in the middle of what was getting to be quite a useful debate

[Best First]

recognising hypocrisy is the path to self improvement.

possibly.

[Metal Vendetta]

recognising hypocrisy is the path to self improvement.

possibly.

I guess so

[Brendocon]

Recognising hypocrisy is the road to self-doubt and identity crisis.

Avoid paranoid schizophrenia through stubborn intransigence!

[Best First]

recognising hypocrisy is the path to self improvement.

possibly.

I guess so

or, er, just cos you do something don't let tat put you off telling off someone else for it.

har.

[Yaya]

Well, you’ll probably have a better chance of that happening if you posted in a manner that was respectful of his right to have a different belief to you, regardless of whether you respect that belief itself (a distinction people often seem to fail to make).

I guess the question is what are you actually hoping to achieve?

He wants to convince me that my belief is based on violent inclinations and oppressive tendencies.

He will fail miserably.

I have discussed my belief, and the very same points with Impy and MV for what seems like months now. However, seeing as others would like to constructively continue this discussion by having me counter..

I've addressed Yaya's dubious post, point-by-point.

By tossing insults? Give me something more substantial than that, for God's sake, if you want to debate.

Islam was forged in violence and bloodshed, and the 'eternal and perfect' holy texts are littered with calls to violence, aggression and expansionist agenda.

Then by all means, provide what we Muslims call daleel. Evidence. Give me your evidence, instead of attacking with blanket generalizations all too often made in history class and in Western media (I have heard them since I was a young lad and they bore me), and I will give you mine, with references if you like. Show me those verses you claim as your argument, but give me the context, give me the history of what was happening the moment those verses were revealed. You won't. Because you don't know the history. You don't know what those verses refer to.

The Prophet (PBUH) said that anyone who interprets a verse of the Koran from his own belief or interpretation without consulting with him on its actual meaning, even if the person was right, has committed a grave sin. Self-interpretation of the Koran or Hadith are grave sins in Islam.

I will respond to you DH, not with my words, but with references.

It will take me some time to collect them. Bear with me.

[Shanti418]

Qur'an Justice, Mmmmmmmm-mm!

[Impactor returns 2.0]

Not being funny Yaya but any evidence we show you, you say that its western and thus wrong? - Its kind of like saying everything you say is wrong because its from the middle east and thus backwards...

Not sure how we can provide evidence unless you perhaps except that western news isnt all BS - which I agree alot of US news is...

[The Last Autobot]

Recognising hypocrisy is the road to self-doubt and identity crisis.

Avoid paranoid schizophrenia through stubborn intransigence!

Schizophrenia? maybe. Paranoid? I dont think so.


I always thought Yaya was christian until recently (couple of months) he showed us he was a dedicated muslim.


Believe it or not.

[Shanti418]

Recognising hypocrisy is the road to self-doubt and identity crisis.

Avoid paranoid schizophrenia through stubborn intransigence!

Schizophrenia? maybe. Paranoid? I dont think so.


I always thought Yaya was christian until recently (couple of months) he showed us he was a dedicated muslim.


Believe it or not.

You think you're bad...until the past week, I didn't know Yaya was a guy!

[Metal Vendetta]

TBH I always thought Yaya was an alt-ID for Commander Shockwav...shows how wrong I can be...

[Yaya]

Not being funny Yaya but any evidence we show you, you say that its western and thus wrong? - Its kind of like saying everything you say is wrong because its from the middle east and thus backwards...
...

This is partly true, Impy.

Anything you say against Islam, I will likely label as false or inaccurate, and anything I say in defense of Islam, you will likely label as the same.

It comes down to a matter of who you believe, really. Western writers have a tendency to misinterpret or twist facts, either intentionally or unintentionally, about Islam. I don't say this blindly. I myself was born American, to white parent, in a white neighborhood, and grew up with the Flintstones and Smurfs like any other American. I know the mindset of one educated in the West because I myself am a product of Western education. Because of this, I have the advantage of knowing how those in America come to learn of Islam, and the image of it that is ingrained upon students from a young age.

Even with an accurate presentation of the facts, however, you and others will likely find Islam not to your liking. For example, Islam forbids premarital sexual relations. Men are permitted to have more than one wife. There are gender roles that are required to be fulfilled. Prayer five times a day is prescribed. Etc, etc, etc. These things you find distasteful and unnecessary, I view as keys to living a content life with the pleasure of my Creator at its center. I do not deny that Islam teaches these things, and if you find them distasteful, this is your right. I will not change the facts to make Islam more pallatable to you or anyone else, for these things are truly Islamic doctrines.

But to label Islam as a violent religion, as DH does above, that I have to refute and provide you evidence that this is not the case. Not because I am out to convert you, or even to get you to like me, but rather to state what the truth is.

If Islam is the religion that DH above claims it to be, why then is it the fastest growing religion in the world? Because people want to blow things up? Because they want to become hateful people? If I came across a religion the likes of which DH is portraying, I would stay the hell away, as far away as I could.

I said what you said above was partly true. What part is false? I also feel like much of what comes out of Middle Eastern media, and Saudi Arabia in particular, is ******** as well. Because just as there are those in power here who seek to further their ends by twisting the truth, so it is with the Saudi princes who have little concern for anyone else in the world but themselves. They desire that fatwas be issued when their personal needs are at stake, and force the Islamic scholars to issue these fatwas to further their ends. It is so easy now to pass a fatwa on anything, its a joke.

Anyway, I will provide DH with actual verses and Hadith refuting what he is claiming. If you then want to believe them as false, again, that is up to you.