Christianity vs. Islam

[Yaya]

are you not basically warning people not to extrapooate from a small number of examples they have seen and then doing exactly that when describing humanity?

I don't know, I've met and seen a lot of people in my life. We are all human beings, and in the end we desire much of the same thing.

i think you are presuming to speak for people a bit too much, and over simplifying too much.

your statements a lot like saying 'religion is evil' - there's some truth in it or the motive behind saying it but that's not the whole picture.

if people just wanted to get on with life they wouldn't actually feel any need to believe in a higher being, for example.

plus i think its fair to say most of us have met and seen a lot of people

I don't deny its a generalization.

[Dead Head]

And there is no room for selfishness and mistrust in the religion of Islam.

So Yaya, gay people everywhere should be not be reproached/thought ill of/punished/intimidated/threatened/killed for their disposition/partnership, yes?
You approve, yes?

And individuals everywhere who wish to change to a faith from Islam should not be reproached/thought ill of/punished/intimidated/threatened/killed for their choice, yes?
You approve, yes?

And people everywhere who choose to voice critical opinion/satire/parodic imitation of all religious topics and figures should not be threatened/punished/intimidated/threatened/killed and should be allowed to hold and voice such opinions, yes?
You approve, yes?

[Shanti418]

I don't know if you're being serious, or if you're just trying to be faithful to your namessake.





And Yaya, based on that post there, it seems like you've been painted into a corner.

[Yaya]

And there is no room for selfishness and mistrust in the religion of Islam.

So Yaya, gay people everywhere should be not be reproached/thought ill of/punished/intimidated/threatened/killed for their disposition/partnership, yes?
You approve, yes?

Show me where it says in Islam that gay people should be killed, Dead Head, or are you again making Islam up as you go along?

And individuals everywhere who wish to change to a faith from Islam should not be reproached/thought ill of/punished/intimidated/threatened/killed for their choice, yes?
You approve, yes?

Not the way you are putting it, I don't.

Treason to many countries, including our own, is punishable by death, yet most see that as legitimate, right? Because in the mind of many, betraying your country is the ultimate crime. How is it then that the law can determine that betrayal of a land is worthy of execution and is considered legitimate, yet the betrayal of God cannot be? Moreover, such treason to God under Islamic law is valid only in Muslim lands and does not hold true in other parts of the world that do not hold Islam as their legal system. If a Muslim becomes Christian in the US, for example, under Islam there is no punishment due to them.

And people everywhere who choose to voice critical opinion/satire/parodic imitation of all religious topics and figures should not be threatened/punished/intimidated/threatened/killed and should be allowed to hold and voice such opinions, yes?
You approve, yes?

That depends on what you mean by 'intimidated'. Certainly, Muslims or any other religious peoples should have the right to peacefully protest the desecration by other lands of their religious figures. They should have the right to boycott that lands products if they so choose. Just as the satirist have a right to expression, so too should the Muslims or Christians or anyone else. If they commit such 'parodic imitations' under Islamic rule, however, they should be subjected to whatever punishment the Islamic scholars see as appropriate based on the Koran and Hadith.

[Dead Head]

Of course you defend your religion's appalling outlook on these matters...
..."Don't blame me! It's not my rules - it's Allah's!"

And there is no room for selfishness and mistrust in the religion of Islam.

So Yaya, gay people everywhere should be not be reproached/thought ill of/punished/intimidated/threatened/killed for their disposition/partnership, yes?
You approve, yes?

Show me where it says in Islam that gay people should be killed, Dead Head, or are you again making Islam up as you go along?

Let me break it up for you. Hopefully you'll say 'yes' to all, but somehow I doubt it:

Gay people everywhere should be not be reproached for their disposition/partnership, yes?
Gay people everywhere should be not be thought ill of for their disposition/partnership, yes?
Gay people everywhere should be not be punished for their disposition/partnership, yes?
Gay people everywhere should be not be intimidated for their disposition/partnership, yes?
Gay people everywhere should be not be threatened for their disposition/partnership, yes?
Gay people everywhere should be not be killed for their disposition/partnership, yes?

And individuals everywhere who wish to change to a faith from Islam should not be reproached/thought ill of/punished/intimidated/threatened/killed for their choice, yes?
You approve, yes?

I don't.

The short version of your answer there. Given the circumstances, you would let a leaver of Islam get his grim 'comeuppance'. So tolerant, so moderate, so mainstream Islam.

And people everywhere who choose to voice critical opinion/satire/parodic imitation of all religious topics and figures should not be threatened/punished/intimidated/threatened/killed and should be allowed to hold and voice such opinions, yes?
You approve, yes?

If they commit such 'parodic imitations' under Islamic rule, however, they should be subjected to whatever punishment the Islamic scholars see as appropriate based on the Koran and Hadith.

In other words, draw Mo/take the michael out of the prophets/satirize the koran/et cetera, and given the circumstances, violence/death from muslims will be upon your head. Moderate and charming islamic edict as ever.

[Yaya]

Of course you defend your religion's appalling outlook on these matters...
..."Don't blame me! It's not my rules - it's Allah's!"

What you find appalling, we find appropriate. It's a matter of perspective. I'll take God's guidance over Dead Head's anyday.

Let me break it up for you. Hopefully you'll say 'yes' to all, but somehow I doubt it:

Gay people everywhere should be not be reproached for their disposition/partnership, yes?

People should not be approached about their sexual orientation in the first place. Islam forbids the open display of sexuality outside the home with one's spouse, regardless of sexual orientation. So you forgot to include that in your criticisms as well. I'm not here to convince you that Islam can fit what you think is right.

Gay people everywhere should be not be thought ill of for their disposition/partnership, yes?

Homosexuality is forbidden in Islam, considered a sin, yes. But whether that person should be thought ill of, that is for God to decide. Talking back to one's parents and missing one of the five daily prayers are bigger transgressions, but I've done both before. Does that make me someone who should be 'thought ill of'? Perhaps. That is for God to decide (and I pray He forgives me for that).

Gay people everywhere should be not be punished for their disposition/partnership, yes?

Everywhere? No. But in Muslim lands where Islamic Shariah (Law) is the law of the land, and homosexual behavior is openly displayed outside the privacy of one's home, I'm sure some form of punishment would be due (though I don't know what that punishment would be as I am not a Faquee (Islamic judge based on scholarship).

Gay people everywhere should be not be intimidated for their disposition/partnership, yes?
Gay people everywhere should be not be threatened for their disposition/partnership, yes?
Gay people everywhere should be not be killed for their disposition/partnership, yes?

See above, yada, yada.

The short version of your answer there. Given the circumstances, you would let a leaver of Islam get his grim 'comeuppance'. So tolerant, so moderate, so mainstream Islam.

And yet one can betray your land and mine, the U.S., and be killed justly all the same. Where is the tolerance and moderation there? Don't get me wrong, I think betraying a land is worthy of whatever that country sees fit. But to a Muslim, God comes before country.

If they commit such 'parodic imitations' under Islamic rule, however, they should be subjected to whatever punishment the Islamic scholars see as appropriate based on the Koran and Hadith.

In other words, draw Mo/take the michael out of the prophets/satirize the koran/et cetera, and given the circumstances, violence/death from muslims will be upon your head. Moderate and charming islamic edict as ever.

I don't know, again, what punishment would be due to someone who satirized someone, but whatever it is, it should apply. Unlike your belief, freedom of speech should have its limits, and does in a Muslim land. Whether you think or works or not, that's your opinion. In a Muslim land, Shariah applies, not Dead Head's. It defines right and wrong based on the Koran and Hadith.

And are you Death's Head, or Dead Head, because every one of your statements ends in "yes?"

[Best First]

freedom of speech should have its limits

why?

[Impactor returns 2.0]

Because Allah said so?

I dont think its that freedom of speech should have limits but more importantly what happens when u say somthing.

there can be no limits, because u cannot inforce what ppl say but what can be inforced is the punishment to what ppl say.

Islamic punishment & reaction seems absurd in the context and without Allah here to talk, whos to say he even gives a **** anyhows?

[Yaya]

freedom of speech should have its limits

why?

Hear that sound?

Me thinks that's the sound of another big can of worms popping open.

Well, we would need another 200 post thread to discuss whether there should be limits to freedom of speech.

Come to think of it, didn't we have that very discussion not so long ago?

Anyway, I think freedom of speech, of anything really, without limitations can be harmful, both at an individual and social level.

I mean, we are not a planet of robots......uncaring......unfeeling....
Where have I heard this before?

[Best First]

good cop out.

the only reasonnot tohave freedom of speech is when you are afrid your ideas don't stand up to scrutiny.

Of course the same is true of threatening people with death if they don't conform to your ideas, which you also suppot it would seem.

to be honest your responses to that last set of questions pretty much make me think that there is something a bit rotten at the core of Islam.

[Dead Head]

Yaya: "appropriate. It's a matter of perspective. I'll take God's guidance"
Yaya: "what punishment would be due to someone who satirized someone should apply"

As ever, grevious vicious bigotry dressed up as wonderful divine regulation. A typical religious shutting down of one's mental faculties, in favour of passing the buck and allowing/enjoining in the DIVINE wrath of your most holy and great god. The humanity!

good cop out.

the only reason not to have freedom of speech is when you are afrid your ideas don't stand up to scrutiny.

Of course the same is true of threatening people with death if they don't conform to your ideas, which you also suppot it would seem.

to be honest your responses to that last set of questions pretty much make me think that there is something a bit rotten at the core of Islam.

Truth there, Best First.


And to think that in these times, over a billion (and growing) Muslims hold such wickedly barbaric and brutally intolerant ("but godly!!!!1") positions. Well done, Allah. Well done, Mohammad. Such beautiful and holy rules.




THIS is Islam held by the 'overwhelming majority of moderates'. THESE are just a subset of the backward, unjust and dehumanizing rules followed by so very many across the globe. "Moderation" and "tolerance" must have been redefined when I was out taking a leak.

[Best First]

do you ever stop to ponder the irony of denoucing religion in the manner of a raving fanatic?

[Yaya]

to be honest your responses to that last set of questions pretty much make me think that there is something a bit rotten at the core of Islam.

To approach Islam with our background, "our" meaning one spurned from a Western foundation, where limitless freedoms are viewed as the most effective ideology and as a necessity, admittedly several concepts of Islam would be difficult to digest and accept. There is certainly a clash in values and ideas between an Islamic based government, and current day Western governments.

An Islamic-based government operates on the premise that there is no separation of church and state. Islam is more a way of life than just a religion. It regulates all aspects of one's life, both personal and social. It is based on the premise that, though some things may not be appealing to our own personal desires, functionally, it is the best because God knows what is best of His creation.

As such, you cannot have both co-existing in the same land. You have to have one or the other. Islam is not incompatible with other beliefs, however. Christians and Jews both lived in Muslim nations and were allowed to practice their beliefs peacefully.

One should have the right to choose where they would want to live, and how they would live it. One should not have any ideology forced upon them. But that right should exist for Muslims too. If Muslims choose to live by Islamic law, should Western government structure be forced upon them because it is felt to be superior to any other ideology in the world?

Islamic law and the Western law can coexist peacefully in the world. But in the same land, I don't think so. Both should be given the right to exist, and neither should be forced on the other. Sadly, however, the media has created the idea that Islam is out to conquer the world, to spread their faith 'by the sword' to all corners of the globe. That's just wrong. If anything, today we see the opposite. Western ideology is being spread by the bomb.

[Dead Head]

though some things may not be appealing to our own personal desires, functionally, it is the best because God knows what is best of His creation.

As ever, grevious vicious bigotry dressed up as wonderful divine regulation.

Christians and Jews both lived in Muslim nations and were allowed to practice their beliefs peacefully.

HAH! What a joke. What propaganda. You mean as long as they knew their place, and all the oppressive dhimmi restrictions that go with it.

a Western foundation, where limitless freedoms are viewed as the most effective ideology and as a necessity

What?! Limitless freedoms? Oh yes, I forgot "The Right To Rape" and "The Right To Abduct", amongst other limitless freedom western foundations.

[Yaya]

HAH! What a joke. What propaganda. You mean as long as they knew their place, and all the oppressive dhimmi restrictions that go with it.

Even Jewish historians have written that some of the best years in their history had been when they lived with the Muslim Moors in Spain. They paid the Jizya, the tax of protection, and were allowed to practice their religion.

What?! Limitless freedoms? Oh yes, I forgot "The Right To Rape" and "The Right To Abduct", amongst other limitless freedom western foundations.

How many times have we seen convicted rapists and murderers in the West go free only to commit the very same crime again because they got out on a technicality? Does O.J. Simpson ring a bell? We still hear the cries for justice from the family of the murdered, but do they get it?

Let me tell you this. In a land ruled by Islamic law, at least O.J. Simpson would be dead. Rapists would not be getting out of jail in two years to rape again. Murderers would not murder again, because you can't kill someone when you're no longer living. Some might find this harsh. But justice is not always pleasant.

Going back to the whole freedom of speech thing, I would refer you to a well known Muslim scholar, who is far more knowledgable than myself about such issues: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 4755452693

[Dead Head]

HAH! What a joke. What propaganda. You mean as long as they knew their place, and all the oppressive dhimmi restrictions that go with it.

Even Jewish historians have written that some of the best years in their history had been when they lived with the Muslim Moors in Spain. They paid the Jizya, the tax of protection, and were allowed to practice their religion.

Hah! That's a clever way to gloss over the dhimmi oppression, taxation, rights restriction and sanctioned inferiority of said non-Muslims.

Ah yes, the 'wonderful' Muslim invasion (long preceding the xian crusades) and centuries of occupation in Spain. Islam spread through the middle east, north africa and southern europe by hippy-like Muslims with flowers in their hair and a message of "peace, maaaaan!" NOT. Once again, Mo and his battlehungry followers spread their vile Islam through expansionist warmongering.

No need to wonder what was prescribed for gays, ex-muslims, and critics of islam, back then, eh? The same deadly god-inspired decrees that is still endorsed today by multimillions of muslims.

What?! Limitless freedoms? Oh yes, I forgot "The Right To Rape" and "The Right To Abduct", amongst other limitless freedom western foundations.

How many times have we seen convicted rapists and murderers in the West go free only to commit the very same crime again because they got out on a technicality?

Hang the fvck on a minute!!

YOU started talking about western civilisation's hard-on for 'limitless freedoms' (i.e. some absurd notion of yours that westerners want to be able to do ANYTHING abhorrent/not abhorrent, with little or no redress), and NOW you're changing tack and talking about the falldowns of western legal systems to derive watertight convictions and incarcerations! As if that has _anything_ to do with a craving for 'limitless freedoms'! That kind of misdirection doesn't wash here.

Those two things are COMPLETELY different points and well you know it. Western civilisations do NOT have a thing for LIMITLESS freedoms as you've suggested. That is utter boollacks. To then go on and defend that absurd claim by mentioning the imperfection of western criminal justice is a mad and bad deception.

.
.
.
.

'Limitless freedom' my ass. Allowing gays, apostates, idol worshippers, and religious critics to thrive in western society DOES NOT mean that the west is 'a land of limitless freedom' or is 'a decadent godless hellhole' or is 'an amoral/immoral bandit country' or is a 'ethically bankrupt free-for-all cesspit'.

.
.
.
.

Sing along and be afraid, Muslims:-

# "gay lions and apostate tigers and blasphemous bears, oh my!!!" #

[Yaya]

Ah yes, the 'wonderful' Muslim invasion (long preceding the xian crusades) and centuries of occupation in Spain. Islam spread through the middle east, north africa and southern europe by hippy-like Muslims with flowers in their hair and a message of "peace, maaaaan!" NOT. Once again, Mo and his battlehungry followers spread their vile Islam through expansionist warmongering.

Firstly, Muhammad (PBUH) was not even alive when the Muslims ruled Spain, or any of the land east of Arabia for that matter, so get your facts straight....again.

Secondly, the Muslim empire was seen as a threat to neighboring Christian and pagan lands. Muslim envoys were sent to these lands peacefully offering them Islam, only to have their heads returned to Arabia in a basket, and threatened with conquest. These threatening letters have been recorded by Arabian historians. That is Islamic history. Western historians likely have another tale to tell, I don't know. Being a Muslim-hater yourself though, I doubt you would put much stock into anything Muslim historians might have to say, would you?

This is not to say Muslim nations have not been guilty of atrocities, as certainly, they have been. Some continue to be to this day. Being Muslim does not make one incapable of committing the worst evils. But the "conquest" of Spain during the time right after Muhammad's (PBUH) death was not for the sake of land or out of a warmongering nature, but a response to a call for war, a war which the Muslims won. They ursurped the territory of those they defeated, but allowed them to continue to practice their religion. Again, even Jewish historians will not refute this. http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:fl ... =clnk&cd=8 They did not torture their captives, like some nations that claim to be a beacon of light for the world do today.

YOU started talking about western civilisation's hard-on for 'limitless freedoms' NOW you're changing tack and talking about the falldowns of western legal systems
Those two things are COMPLETELY different points

Yes, I know, I was referring to the other point I made above regarding the Islamic legal system and its comparision to the West.

Yes, I grant you that the West does not have "limitless freedom", as the end result would be anarchy. I was under the impression you were one of those who sought that, however. In any case, some feel the ideal would be to have the right to say anything to anyone at anytime. I disagree wholeheartedly with that.

[Dead Head]

Mo and his battlehungry followers spread their vile Islam through expansionist warmongering.

Firstly, Muhammad (PBUH) was not even alive when the Muslims ruled Spain, or any of the land east of Arabia for that matter, so get your facts straight....again.

I did NOT claim or wish to imply that he was alive through all of the early islamic landgrab. I am well aware that he expired in 632. I said Mo and his followers, as in his successors. Do not twist my words... again.

Secondly, the Muslim empire was seen as a threat to neighboring Christian and pagan lands.

Well wonders never cease!

Muslim envoys were sent to these lands peacefully offering them Islam

Ah yes... "peacefully". In other words, 'accept the offer of Islam... or ELSE.'

That is Islamic history. Western historians likely have another tale to tell, I don't know.

Oh yeeeah, Islamic history is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, whereas western history is a massive distortion and utter lies. It comes from us being decadent and corrupt infidels, of course. Sheeeesh!

Being a Muslim-hater yourself though, I doubt you would put much stock into anything Muslim historians might have to say, would you?

You aligning yourself with cruel religious edicts of gay hatred, of apostate hatred, and of 'blasphemer' hatred, I doubt that that's the limit of your unwarranted intolerance. Being a spineless and blinkered apologist for Islam's cruelty and intolerance yourself, I doubt you would do anything other than paint a happy-clappy rose-tinted picture of Islam, and Mo and his followers.

the "conquest" of Spain

the conquest of Spain

a Western foundation, where limitless freedoms are viewed as the most effective ideology and as a necessity

Yes, I grant you that the West does not have "limitless freedom"

Zing!

[Yaya]

Being a spineless and blinkered apologist

Why should I apologize to someone who has no problem calling others spiteful names, particularly to someone they have never met.

Your prejudiced, son. You have never met me, yet you have no problem labelling me "spineless", "violent", etc. If you have something against Islam, fine. It's your right. But people will always fall into shades of gray, not black or white. Never have I said that a homosexual will certainly burn in Hell, or deserves to.

You have made your point. You don't like Islam. Some don't. But how that gives you the green light to persist in tossing insults my way, going so far as to even call my own wife names, well, I think that says a lot about how Dead Head operates and sees the world. It also comes off has quite childish, I might add.

Bitter, prejudiced hatred of over a billion people worldwide does not a peaceful world make.

I can assure you, a world of clamoring Dead Heads would be much worse off than a world full of Muslims.

I'll have to remember to thank God that this is not the case.

I have nothing more to say to you. I'm lowering my own self if I continue to do so. When you actually learn some etiquette in dealing with others, let me know. Maybe then we can have some discourse.

[Yaya]

double post

[Best First]

as much as i would continue to suggest that DH ponders the fact that sprinkling hsi posts with hahs! and stuff like that is doing no one, and especially him any favours, i can't help but feel you have zeroed in on those insults at the cost of addressing valid questions.

also you rather undermine your point about him making judgements about someone he has never met by saying that you can assure him that a world full of people like him would be worse than a world full of people like you.

your ettiqutte in dealing with people is hardly beyond reproach either.

[Yaya]

as much as i would continue to suggest that DH ponders the fact that sprinkling hsi posts with hahs! and stuff like that is doing no one, and especially him any favours, i can't help but feel you have zeroed in on those insults at the cost of addressing valid questions.

I have to cash in here.

I don't mind debate, but you have to draw the line somewhere. The guy has called me and my wife name after name, has used offensive terms regarding my faith and my Prophet (PBUH), and I can't help but feel I'm not supposed to continue with this discussion. I've overlooked this time and again with him, but seriously, what kind of schmuck would I have to be to give this guy further chances to toss insults my way? Anytime I make a point, its "Oooohh Riiiight [insert sarcastic insult here]".

All I ask is for some mutual civility. When you debate, you should show your 'opponent' at least a pretence of respect, if nothing more.

also you rather undermine your point about him making judgements about someone he has never met by saying that you can assure him that a world full of people like him would be worse than a world full of people like you.

Yes, I do. Mudslinging often leads to more mudslinging. So I'm human. Sue me.

your ettiqutte in dealing with people is hardly beyond reproach either.

I like to think I have been rather patient with DH. As far as my etiquette goes, I'm quite sure it has not reached the level that DH has in this discussion. I have tried to address him as someone that maybe doesn't know too much about Islam or its teachings, as someone who should be given the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps he met some Muslims who were assholes, and that's all he has to go by. Not so.

[Dead Head]

Being a spineless and blinkered apologist

Why should I apologize to someone who has no problem calling others spiteful names, particularly to someone they have never met.

More sneaky snake tactics from you. Nice deliberate misinterpretation of "apologist" there. To any rational person it is obvious that I meant a yesman for their faith. You're not fooling anybody with this 'woe is me' strawman misdirection.

Your prejudiced, son.

I'm post-judiced, if anything. Islam has had numerous auditions, and shows itself to be rotten. I haven't judged before the fact.

You're the one with nasty proxy prejudices against all the groupings that Islam condemns. Of course, you have your godly euphemisms when trying to spindoctor these Islamic edicts as something 'good' for the world, when in reality they are most despicable things.

You have made your point. You don't like Islam. Some don't. But how that gives you the green light to persist in tossing insults my way, going so far as to even call my own wife names, well, I think that says a lot about how Dead Head operates and sees the world. It also comes off has quite childish, I might add.

That's it. Continue the 'woe is me' schtick to distract away from the vile points of your Islam. It's not working. It would be far better to just admit to the bigotry that your faith enables, instead of this laughable distraction tactic.

I can assure you, a world of clamoring Dead Heads would be much worse off than a world full of Muslims.

The peculiar thing is that a world full of Dead Heads, in their secular church-and-state-separated world, would allow you to believe and to privately practice the non-contentious pacifist aspects of your faith/lifestyle, just like alongside the gays, the religious satirists, the apostates, the jews, the christians, the idol worshippers, the hindus, the blasphemers, the agnostics, the atheists, the falun gongists, the beer drinkers, the music lovers, the shintos, the buddhists, the swingers, the Playboy readers, the gamblers, the beach bums, the mormons, the amish, and so on. Yaya: "Agh! Ze goggles! Zey do nuzzing!"

Your Islam would not grant the same reciprocation and tolerance to all.

I can assure you, a world of clamoring Dead Heads would be much worse off than a world full of Muslims.

I can assure you, a world of clamoring Yayas would be much worse off than a world full of Dead Heads.

When you actually learn some etiquette in dealing with others, let me know.

That's right - keep on supporting your religion's many bigotries Yaya!

[Dead Head]

The guy has called me and my wife name after name, has used offensive terms regarding my faith and my Prophet (PBUH), and I can't help but feel I'm not supposed to continue with this discussion.

More and more attempts to distract from Islam's very crappy teachings.
.

Humoring you for a minute, your attempts to play the 'dishonored wife' sympathy card is a sham. Stop playing to the gallery. Here's the sole previous exchange between us where you first mentioned your Muslim wife. I still maintain that BOTH of you, and indeed all other Muslims/Christians et cetera, are foolish in what they cling to:

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.

Calling my wife a fool and then labeling others as hateful? Have you met my wife? If there's one thing I can't stand more than a prejudging hatemonger, its a prejudging hypocrite.

No, I'm calling you BOTH fools. Just that she's a bigger one give the even shorter straw your faith deals women.

Again, you're the Muslim, you're the one hatin' on gays, on satire of Mo', on teen girls having boyfriends, and so on. I detest such positions. My detest is the exception, your hate is the 'divine' rule.

I have tried to address him as someone that maybe doesn't know too much about Islam or its teachings, as someone who should be given the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps he met some Muslims who were assholes, and that's all he has to go by. Not so.

Let me assure you that I know very much about your faith.

As for interactions with Muslims, I've had plenty of dealings with people of all faiths/non-faiths in my years so far. Inside and outside of work.

[Best First]

The guy has called me and my wife name after name, has used offensive terms regarding my faith and my Prophet (PBUH), and I can't help but feel I'm not supposed to continue with this discussion.

More and more attempts to distract from Islam's very crappy teachings.

maybe you should stop handing him the opportunity to do so?

all it requires is for you to make your points without being a dick about it.

[Predabot]

EDIT

**** Stop pointlessly ressurecting dead and buried threads you pointless idiot - BF ****