Muslim American-Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happines

[raybia]

The recent controversy of whether or not Obama was Muslim rubbed me the wrong way as being a Muslim and being American are not compatible.

I offer these 3 of 6 parts by Faheem Shuiabe, a student of Imam W. Deen Mohammed, leader of the largest Muslim community in America.


XMDXZQQ_GQ0&feature=related

AshUH3TZjxA&NR=1


ylKiyO_xrIU&feature=related

[Superman4ever]

Raybia thank you for this. The controversy upset me too. The fact that the right was using his middle name as a scare tactic sickened me. Anyways, do you have a youtube account I have many inspirational videos that I think could cheer you up.

I'll PM you later if you want them!

[Warhammer]

Great thread.

I look at it this way. Even if Obama was a Muslim, what does that have to do with how he will run the country? He would be President to the best of his ability, regardless of religion. People who discriminate against Muslims in this country are ignorant and bigoted. My father is a Muslim, and that has inspired me to accept and embrace people of all religions.

[Superman4ever]

Great thread.

I look at it this way. Even if Obama was a Muslim, what does that have to do with how he will run the country? He would be President to the best of his ability, regardless of religion. People who discriminate against Muslims in this country are ignorant and bigoted. My father is a Muslim, and that has inspired me to accept and embrace people of all religions.

What really saddens me is that the media keeps bombarding us with images of these horrible, and indefensible, extremist acts and it's being manipulated as if the religion advocates these acts.

It really hurts when the Right uses Obama's middle name as a scare tactic. It continues this circle of ignorance and hate.


Actually, this link will take you to a free online documentary page. If you go under the religion tab there are some very informative documentaries about Islam that I think some people might enjoy. (http://www.bodocus.com/)

[Warhammer]

What really saddens me is that the media keeps bombarding us with images of these horrible, and indefensible, extremist acts and it's being manipulated as if the religion advocates these acts.

It really hurts when the Right uses Obama's middle name as a scare tactic. It continues this circle of ignorance and hate.


Actually, this link will take you to a free online documentary page. If you go under the religion tab there are some very informative documentaries about Islam that I think some people might enjoy. (http://www.bodocus.com/)

Thanks for the link. I know what you mean. The media does not tell what it really is. Those people are crazy people. They just happen to be Muslims. That doesn't mean that Allah spoke to them and told them to do it. The media disgusts me sometimes.

[MetalGear7]

Now this muslim feels bad for never using his middle name ali....

[terry78]

People hear the word Muslim nowadays and the knee jerk reactions run rampant. Mindless sheep grazing on the lawn of fear mongering.

[raybia]

Now this muslim feels bad for never using his middle name ali....

You shouldn't. The quality of your character is much more important.

[BatSpider]

That is awesome Raybia

[MetalGear7]

well I don't pray like I should, and I eat fast food and make funny racist jokes, but I like to think of myself as believing in Allah and therefore as long as I dont murder anyone I'm going straight to Heaven, what you think raybia

[BatSpider]

well I don't pray like I should, and I eat fast food and make funny racist jokes, but I like to think of myself as believing in Allah and therefore as long as I dont murder anyone I'm going straight to Heaven, what you think raybia
I have studied Islam and I don't think that's how it should be.

You should do everything in your power to be true to your god and shread your word of Islam

[Backdrifter]

Certainly there are a lot of nice and peaceful Muslims out there. But, you can not ignore the very dark side of the religion. The Qur'an commands apostates (people who have left their faith) to be put to death. In many middle eastern countries these kinds of people in addition to homosexuals and other law breakers are killed in public executions.

Unfortunately, the extremist version of Islam is quickly taking hold of the entire middle east region. The president of Iran is the poster child for state sponsored terrorism. Iran has been found to financially supporting Hamas and Hezbollah.

The simple fact is that despite how peaceful people would like Islam to seem, its laws and rules are rather extreme, especially in regards to the way it treats women.

You can say all you want about Christians and all the things they did, and I will be the first to agree with you, they were awful. But, none of it lines up with Christ's teachings and his life. Jesus' message was that of love,peace and the worship of God. He never once ordered anyone to put killed for turning away from God. In fact, he described how much it pains the Lord to see one of his sheep wander away from the flock. He never lead a political revolution. He came humbly, lived a perfect life free of sin, took on the sins of mankind and died for us so that we may spend eternity with Him free of pain and suffering.

CS Lewis says it better than I can"

" But unfortunately we now need God's help in order to do something which God, in His own nature, never does at all--to surrender, to suffer, to submit, to die. Nothing in God's nature corresponds to this process at all. So that the one road for which we now need God's leadership most of all is a road God, in His own nature, has never walked. God can share only what He has; this thing, in His own nature, He has not.

But supposing God became a man--suppose our human nature which can suffer and die was amalgamated with God's nature in one person--then that person could help us. He could surrender His will, and suffer and die, because He was man; and He could do it perfectly because He was God. You and I can go through this process only if God does it in us; but God can do it only if He becomes man. Our attempts at this dying will succeed only if we men share in God's dying, just as our thinking can succeed only because it is a drop out of the ocean of His intelligence: but we cannot share God's dying unless God dies; and He cannot die except by being a man. That is the sense in which He pays our debt, and suffers for us what He Himself need not suffer at all."

[MetalGear7]

Certainly there are a lot of nice and peaceful Muslims out there. But, you can not ignore the very dark side of the religion. The Qur'an commands apostates (people who have left their faith) to be put to death. In many middle eastern countries these kinds of people in addition to homosexuals and other law breakers are killed in public executions.

Unfortunately, the extremist version of Islam is quickly taking hold of the entire middle east region. The president of Iran is the poster child for state sponsored terrorism. Iran has been found to financially supporting Hamas and Hezbollah.

The simple fact is that despite how peaceful people would like Islam to seem, its laws and rules are rather extreme, especially in regards to the way it treats women.

You can say all you want about Christians and all the things they did, and I will be the first to agree with you, they were awful. But, none of it lines up with Christ's teachings and his life. Jesus' message was that of love,peace and the worship of God. He never once ordered anyone to put killed for turning away from God. In fact, he described how much it pains the Lord to see one of his sheep wander away from the flock. He never lead a political revolution. He came humbly, lived a perfect life free of sin, took on the sins of mankind and died for us so that we may spend eternity with Him free of pain and suffering.

CS Lewis says it better than I can"

" But unfortunately we now need God's help in order to do something which God, in His own nature, never does at all--to surrender, to suffer, to submit, to die. Nothing in God's nature corresponds to this process at all. So that the one road for which we now need God's leadership most of all is a road God, in His own nature, has never walked. God can share only what He has; this thing, in His own nature, He has not.

But supposing God became a man--suppose our human nature which can suffer and die was amalgamated with God's nature in one person--then that person could help us. He could surrender His will, and suffer and die, because He was man; and He could do it perfectly because He was God. You and I can go through this process only if God does it in us; but God can do it only if He becomes man. Our attempts at this dying will succeed only if we men share in God's dying, just as our thinking can succeed only because it is a drop out of the ocean of His intelligence: but we cannot share God's dying unless God dies; and He cannot die except by being a man. That is the sense in which He pays our debt, and suffers for us what He Himself need not suffer at all."

How do we treat our woman?

[raybia]

well I don't pray like I should, and I eat fast food and make funny racist jokes, but I like to think of myself as believing in Allah and therefore as long as I dont murder anyone I'm going straight to Heaven, what you think raybia

I believe that our lives are the classroom and the Quran is our teacher.

The infant doesn’t condemn itself in its struggle to first crawl, stand and then walk.

No how many times it falls down, it keeps getting up until it has learned how to walk. Before you know it, the infant has grown up and is now able to stand on its own and walk without little effort. It can even run.

Well we are, metaphorically speaking, infants in this world, whether we are 1 or 81, so we shouldn’t give up when we fall.

We should constantly aim to grow and develop our cognitive (intellectual) and spiritual selves along with our physical growth.

So keep striving and don’t worry about your imperfections, because we all have them.

Just focus on becoming the best person you can be.

Heaven is the end goal but we should find heaven in the journey to get there.

In other words heaven is a state of being that can be achieved in this world. We call it happiness.

The journey is what brings us happiness not the destination

[SuperFerret]

I believe that our lives are the classroom and the Quran is our teacher.

The infant doesn’t condemn itself in its struggle to first crawl, stand and then walk.

No how many times it falls down, it keeps getting up until it has learned how to walk. Before you know it, the infant has grown up and is now able to stand on its own and walk without little effort. It can even run.

Well we are, metaphorically speaking, infants in this world, whether we are 1 or 81, so we shouldn’t give up when we fall.

We should constantly aim to grow and develop our cognitive (intellectual) and spiritual selves along with our physical growth.

So keep striving and don’t worry about your imperfections, because we all have them.

Just focus on becoming the best person you can be.

Heaven is the end goal but we should find heaven in the journey to get there.
In other words heaven is a state of being that can be achieved in this world.

It's about the journey, not the destination.

You continually impress me with your wisdom, Raybia. Excellently said.

[raybia]

That is awesome Raybia

thanks!

[raybia]

I have studied Islam and I don't think that's how it should be.

You should do everything in your power to be true to your god and shread your word of Islam

Its all about sincerity and legitimate action in our struggle towards self development and improvement. The greatest struggle of life is from within.

[raybia]

Certainly there are a lot of nice and peaceful Muslims out there. But, you can not ignore the very dark side of the religion.


There is no dark side to Islam but there is a dark side of man.


The Qur'an commands apostates (people who have left their faith) to be put to death.

That is incorrect.

In many middle eastern countries these kinds of people in addition to homosexuals and other law breakers are killed in public executions.

True



The simple fact is that despite how peaceful people would like Islam to seem, its laws and rules are rather extreme, especially in regards to the way it treats women.

the interpretations of the quran used in these places are extreme.

You can say all you want about Christians and all the things they did, and I will be the first to agree with you, they were awful. But, none of it lines up with Christ's teachings and his life. Jesus' message was that of love,peace and the worship of God. He never once ordered anyone to put killed for turning away from God.




Neither did Mohammed.

[Superman4ever]

Certainly there are a lot of nice and peaceful Muslims out there. But, you can not ignore the very dark side of the religion. The Qur'an commands apostates (people who have left their faith) to be put to death. In many middle eastern countries these kinds of people in addition to homosexuals and other law breakers are killed in public executions.

UNTRUE! This is a lie. The Qur'an has NO verse that prescribes punishment for Apostasy (read below). Moreover, the man-made prescribed punishment granted by CORRUPT tyrannical EXTREMISTS is NOT the fault of the religion.

There is no single verse in the Qur'an that prescribes an earthly punishment for apostasy. Verses about apostasy in the Qur'an speak only about God's punishment of the apostate in the Hereafter. The following Qur'anic verses illustrate two examples:

[Your enemies will not cease to fight against you till they have turned you away from your faith, if they can. But if any of you should turn away from his/her faith and die as a denier [of the truth] – these it is whose works will bear no fruit in this world and in the life to come; and these it is who are destined for the fire, therein to abide.] (Al-Baqarah 2:217)6

[Behold, as for those who come to believe, and then deny the truth, and again come to believe, and again deny the truth, and thereafter grow stubborn in their denial of truth — God will not forgive them, nor will guide them in any way.] (An-Nisaa' 4:137)

The silence of the Qur'an on any prescribed mandatory capital for apostasy is quite revealing. More revealing is the fact that there is overwhelming evidence in the Qur'an of freedom of conscious, belief, and worship. The following verses gives an example of this:

[And say [O Muhammad]: 'The truth [has now come] you're your Sustainer: let, then, him or her who wills, believe in it, and let him or her who wills, reject it.] (Al-Kahf 18:29)

[There shall be no coercion in matters of faith.] (Al-Baqarah 2:256)

[And so, [O Prophet,] exhort them; your task is only to exhort. You can not compel them [to believe].] (Al-Ghashiyah 88:21-22)

[Thus, [O Prophet,] if they argue with you, say, "I have surrendered my whole being unto God, and [so have] all who follow me' – and ask those who have been vouchsafed revelation aforetime, as well as the unlettered people, 'Have you [too] surrendered yourselves unto Him?' And if they surrender themselves unto Him, they are on the right path; but if they turn away – behold, your duty is no more than to deliver the message: for God sees all that is in [the hearts of] His creatures.] (Aal `Imran 3:20)

http://www.islamonline.net/English/contemporary/2006/04/article02.shtml

The Qur'an CLEARLY states that we are to avoid excessiveness. (http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1196786209398&pagename=Zone-English-Living_Shariah%2FLSELayout)

Also an "Apostate" in the time of a prophet wasn't merely one who left his religion, that is another category (there are 14 different types of "apostates") he was, more importantly, someone who fought against the community and attempted to kill other Muslims. They specifically fought against the Muslims and the Prophet. There goal was to destroy the community. Think of it as treason.

Moreover, jurisprudence in Islam states that Apostates (those who fought/killed Muslim) are to be tried by the state and are ONLY punishable by death if there is sufficient evidence proving that he:

the cause permitting the legal killing of a disbeliever is his fighting and hostility against Muslims and attempting to lure them away from their religion. In addition, many Qur'anic verses clearly renounce compulsion in religion.


Apostates, who leave the religion by there own accord (i.e. and are not killing Muslims) are "blameless" and should chose their own path. (http://www.islamonline.net/English/contemporary/2006/04/article01e.shtml)

Unfortunately, the extremist version of Islam is quickly taking hold of the entire middle east region. The president of Iran is the poster child for state sponsored terrorism. Iran has been found to financially supporting Hamas and Hezbollah.

You're basing the WHOLE community. All 1.3 billion of us on a few thousand radicals? Does Western policy have any role to play in this? Supporting tyrants who gave us cheap oil clearly is Islam's fault, correct?

The simple fact is that despite how peaceful people would like Islam to seem, its laws and rules are rather extreme, especially in regards to the way it treats women.


Again, is there any proof that Islam advocates extremism against women? No. One, you have cultural rituals that Islam clearly forbids and demolished from it's inception. Moreover, don't confuse corrupt bureaucrats with the religion. The corruption of man is not the fault of the religion.

[raybia]

UNTRUE! This is a lie. The Qur'an has NO verse that prescribes punishment for Apostasy (read below). Moreover, the man-made prescribed punishment granted by CORRUPT tyrannical EXTREMISTS is NOT the fault of the religion.



The silence of the Qur'an on any prescribed mandatory capital for apostasy is quite revealing. More revealing is the fact that there is overwhelming evidence in the Qur'an of freedom of conscious, belief, and worship. The following verses gives an example of this:

[And say [O Muhammad]: 'The truth [has now come] you're your Sustainer: let, then, him or her who wills, believe in it, and let him or her who wills, reject it.] (Al-Kahf 18:29)

[There shall be no coercion in matters of faith.] (Al-Baqarah 2:256)

[And so, [O Prophet,] exhort them; your task is only to exhort. You can not compel them [to believe].] (Al-Ghashiyah 88:21-22)

[Thus, [O Prophet,] if they argue with you, say, "I have surrendered my whole being unto God, and [so have] all who follow me' – and ask those who have been vouchsafed revelation aforetime, as well as the unlettered people, 'Have you [too] surrendered yourselves unto Him?' And if they surrender themselves unto Him, they are on the right path; but if they turn away – behold, your duty is no more than to deliver the message: for God sees all that is in [the hearts of] His creatures.] (Aal `Imran 3:20)

http://www.islamonline.net/English/contemporary/2006/04/article02.shtml

The Qur'an CLEARLY states that we are to avoid excessiveness. (http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1196786209398&pagename=Zone-English-Living_Shariah%2FLSELayout)

Also an "Apostate" in the time of a prophet wasn't merely one who left his religion, that is another category (there are 14 different types of "apostates") he was, more importantly, someone who fought against the community and attempted to kill other Muslims. They specifically fought against the Muslims and the Prophet. There goal was to destroy the community. Think of it as treason.

Moreover, jurisprudence in Islam states that Apostates (those who fought/killed Muslim) are to be tried by the state and are ONLY punishable by death if there is sufficient evidence proving that he:




Apostates, who leave the religion by there own accord (i.e. and are not killing Muslims) are "blameless" and should chose their own path. (http://www.islamonline.net/English/contemporary/2006/04/article01e.shtml)



You're basing the WHOLE community. All 1.3 billion of us on a few thousand radicals? Does Western policy have any role to play in this? Supporting tyrants who gave us cheap oil clearly is Islam's fault, correct?



Again, is there any proof that Islam advocates extremism against women? No. One, you have cultural rituals that Islam clearly forbids and demolished from it's inception. Moreover, don't confuse corrupt bureaucrats with the religion. The corruption of man is not the fault of the religion.

good job!

[Superman4ever]

well I don't pray like I should, and I eat fast food and make funny racist jokes, but I like to think of myself as believing in Allah and therefore as long as I dont murder anyone I'm going straight to Heaven, what you think raybia

Just to point out I completely agree with Raybia on this.

You don't pray is something that you have to rectify when you are good and ready, but again that is your choice.

Fast food's not that big of a deal. If you're concerned about the food not being Halal: You are allowed to say, "In the name of G-d Most gracious, most merciful" before you eat. If it bothers you then simply don't eat fast food. They employ horrific animal cruelty measures anyway, but that's another topic of concern.

However, to simply say that as long as you don't kill a person you're going to go to heaven is unfair. One, only Allah can make judgments (about anything). Two, there are certain codes of morality, conduct and ethics that you as a Muslim should follow. Remember that even though Allah is all merciful and ever loving he is also just. You're NOT going to go to hell for eating at McDonalds but cheating or harming a fellow human being is forbidden. Cheating on a test is forbidden (I don't think you'd go to hell for that either, but wrong is wrong).

A Muslim has to better himself/herself so that he/she can better his/her community and, in turn, society.

[raybia]

You don't pray is something that you have to rectify when you are good and ready, but again that is your choice.

Fast food's not that big of a deal. If you're concerned about the food not being Halal: You are allowed to say, "In the name of G-d Most gracious, most merciful" before you eat. If it bothers you then simply don't eat fast food. They employ horrific animal cruelty measures anyway, but that's another topic of concern.

However, to simply say that as long as you don't kill a person you're going to go to heaven is unfair. One, only Allah can make judgments (about anything). Two, there are certain codes of morality, conduct and ethics that you as a Muslim should follow. Remember that even though Allah is all merciful and ever loving he is also just. You're NOT going to go to hell for eating at McDonalds but cheating or harming a fellow human being is forbidden. Cheating on a test is forbidden (I don't think you'd go to hell for that either, but wrong is wrong).

A Muslim has to better himself/herself so that he/she can better his/her community and, in turn, society.

Real good and sound advise.

Some Muslims are concerned about going to hell after they die but I think we should be more concerned about going to hell while we are alive.

G-d knows I've been there a time or two (or three)

[BatSpider]

I am liking this Raybia and Superman4ever :yay:

[raybia]

I am liking this Raybia and Superman4ever :yay:

superman4ever is the man!

If you want to know where I get most of my understanding of the quran then just P.M. me.

[raybia]

Raybia thank you for this. The controversy upset me too. The fact that the right was using his middle name as a scare tactic sickened me. Anyways, do you have a youtube account I have many inspirational videos that I think could cheer you up.

I'll PM you later if you want them!

I don't have a youtube account but if you could PM me the links I would appreciate it! :yay:

[Superman4ever]

Real good and sound advise.

Some Muslims are concerned about going to hell after they die but I think we should be more concerned about going to hell while we are alive.

Like you said so eloquently in your earlier post, none of us are perfect and life is a journey (to me a beautiful one) that leads to the hereafter. However, we do have responsibilities to be the best examples of ourselves for the betterment of this world. Our religion gives us that foundation.

I certainly believe that everything happens for reason. So all this negativity towards Islam (and the cancer that plagues the Islamic community in the form of militant extremism) will hopefully open doors of understanding and brotherhood.


I am liking this Raybia and Superman4ever :yay:

I like your music, so we're even, lol! LOVE the latest video!

And Raybia is an exemplary representation of what Islam really is about. I just hope I do his friendship justice.

[Backdrifter]

So, what does the Qur’an teach? Does it advocate violence or peace?

The answer is this: It teaches both.

The earlier teachings of Muhammad [the Meccan Suras] have a moderate tone of peace and tolerance toward other religions.

Listen to what the Qur’an says...


Sura 2:190

“Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors.”


Sura 29:46

“And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, [speaking of the Bible, a reference to Christians and Jews].”


But in the later teachings of Muhammad, there was a shift, and the Qur’an advocates a more hostile attitude toward people of other faiths.

For instance, listen to...

Sura 9:5

“So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them”

Sura 8:39

“Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God’s religion shall

reign supreme”


And there are others.

So it’s kind of up to the Muslim to decide which verses he wants his own personal beliefs to be based upon.

If a Muslim wants to live in peace with his neighbors and happily co-exist, with others, then he can find verses that support that.

But if he hates people of other faiths (including Jews and Christians) and wants to spread Islam around the world at any cost, even with violence, then he can find verses in the Qur’an that support that kind of a belief.

Most of the Muslims that you will meet in the United States hold to a peaceful form of Islam.

In fact many of them are very kind people, who often make great neighbors.

In addition, Muhammad was a great military leader and fought many battles.


And yes he does condone murder for apostacy

“If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him."

-The Hadith, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 260

[Superman4ever]

Damn it I was going to go to sleep, I gotta get up at 6AM for rounds.

I'll refer to your last comment first.

And yes he does condone murder for apostacy

“If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him."

-The Hadith, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 260

Did you not read my post? Firstly, this hadith is well known/refereed to throughout the Islamic community as a "weak" hadith with only one chain of command (the more reliable ones have 4 or more, preferably) and, therefore, via Islamic Jurisprudence CANNOT be used as a justification for the death penalty. Ergo the "kill them" is NOT a command. THUS, since it is only interpreted once, by ONE witness, Islamic jurist only justify it's use in the case of extreme HIGH TREASON. Meaning the "apostate" has to declare war on Muslims AND kill them.

Lastly, and more importantly, there is NO reason or evidence that proves that the Prophet Muhammad or any of his companions ever compelled individuals to embrace Islam, NOR did they EVER sentence anyone for simply renouncing their faith. EVER!

Again, the "apostates" that specific hadith is referring to, like I mentioned earlier, are the ones that are FIGHTING and KILLING Muslims unjustly.

I stated in my previous post that there are 14 different types of "apostates" it's not a clear cut case.

Finally, you conveniently forget that the Qur'an doesn't give a worldly punishment for "apostasy" ONLY that G-d will deal with them, if you will, AND that the Qur'an CLEARLY and repeatedly affirms the freedom of conscious and freedom of faith and worship.

http://www.islamonline.net/English/contemporary/2006/04/article02.shtml

I'll get to your other quotes tomorrow morning. Why is it that ALL Islamic threads have to turn into a forum for hate speech? The original intent of this thread was to convey that Muslim-Americans ARE just as American as anyone else who claims that honor. We are NOT second class citizens, traitors or haters of freedom. In fact quite the opposite.

Many of us, especially us migrants from tyrannical regimes CHOOSE to come to the United States to escape persecution.

[raybia]

Why is it that ALL Islamic threads have to turn into a forum for hate speech? The original intent of this thread was to convey that Muslim-Americans ARE just as American as anyone else who claims that honor. We are NOT second class citizens, traitors or haters of freedom. In fact quite the opposite.

Many of us, especially us migrants from tyrannical regimes CHOOSE to come to the United States to escape persecution.

Some would rather not let the original intent be heard so they attempt to drown it out by this tactic of diversion.

[Handsome Rob]

Let me ask this (I'm not trying to stir up anything or be disrespectful--just asking for opinions):

It's been heard among mostly conservatives (and I consider myself a political conservative--paleo, not neo) that the Muslims in America do not publicly denounce terrorist acts as a group. To some, the lack of "calling out" these acts done in the name of Islam makes it appear as if the Muslim community is silently "cheering on" the march of their militant brothers.

Do you, as Muslims and Americans, believe that the Muslim community has been too quiet on Islamic terrorism? Or, do you feel that what outspokenness there is against it has been largely ignored by the major media outlets? Or, do you even feel a responsibility to speak out against it?

The reason I ask the third question is that, unless someone else brings it up, I generally don't go around talking about Westboro Baptist, Abortion Doctor-murderers, and other Christians who commit acts of violence for what they think is the cause of the Christ. Neither do many of my Christian friends.

[raybia]

Let me ask this (I'm not trying to stir up anything or be disrespectful--just asking for opinions):

It's been heard among mostly conservatives (and I consider myself a political conservative--paleo, not neo) that the Muslims in America do not publicly denounce terrorist acts as a group. To some, the lack of "calling out" these acts done in the name of Islam makes it appear as if the Muslim community is silently "cheering on" the march of their militant brothers.


I know for a fact that Imam W.Deen Mohammed, leader of the largest group of Muslims in America and his community, in which I am a member, has in the past and continues to denounce terrorist acts and not just those committed by Muslim extremist groups but acts of terrorism committed by any and all groups who commit or support it.

More importantly we denounce terrorism through our interpretation of the Quran and by example in demonstrating how the proper application of the Islamic way of live is compatible with the American way of life as given in the U.S. constitution.

The more productive and successful Muslims are in America in a community context then the more credible the blueprint Muslim-Americans provide for those Muslims internationally who want freedom, justice and equality but uses un-Islamic tactics to try to unsuccessfully achieve it.

Do you, as Muslims and Americans, believe that the Muslim community has been too quiet on Islamic terrorism? Or, do you feel that what outspokenness there is against it has been largely ignored by the major media outlets? Or, do you even feel a responsibility to speak out against it?

Along with what I said above, I do believe the media could give us more coverage so that we could have more of a voice to be heard. With that said, I don't think thats going to happen anytime soon so I support the Muslim community operating our own major media outlets. In fact, one has been created recently called Bridges T.V. where viewers can see the Muslim community speaking out on terrorism and extremism.

But that is just the beginning.

The media has a responsibility to report the good works of Muslim Americans but we have to be the ones to toot our our horn to negate their efforts to paint us all with the same brush.

The reason I ask the third question is that, unless someone else brings it up, I generally don't go around talking about Westboro Baptist, Abortion Doctor-murderers, and other Christians who commit acts of violence for what they think is the cause of the Christ. Neither do many of my Christian friends.

Good point.

[raybia]

The recent controversy of whether or not Obama was Muslim rubbed me the wrong way as being a Muslim and being American are not compatible.

I offer these 3 of 6 parts by Faheem Shuiabe, a student of Imam W. Deen Mohammed, leader of the largest Muslim community in America.


XMDXZQQ_GQ0&feature=related

AshUH3TZjxA&NR=1


ylKiyO_xrIU&feature=related

This is the focus of the thread and I invite all to watch these 3 parts and the remaining 3 of the set.

[Superman4ever]

Let me ask this (I'm not trying to stir up anything or be disrespectful--just asking for opinions):

It's been heard among mostly conservatives (and I consider myself a political conservative--paleo, not neo) that the Muslims in America do not publicly denounce terrorist acts as a group. To some, the lack of "calling out" these acts done in the name of Islam makes it appear as if the Muslim community is silently "cheering on" the march of their militant brothers.

Do you, as Muslims and Americans, believe that the Muslim community has been too quiet on Islamic terrorism? Or, do you feel that what outspokenness there is against it has been largely ignored by the major media outlets? Or, do you even feel a responsibility to speak out against it?

The reason I ask the third question is that, unless someone else brings it up, I generally don't go around talking about Westboro Baptist, Abortion Doctor-murderers, and other Christians who commit acts of violence for what they think is the cause of the Christ. Neither do many of my Christian friends.

This is a good question actually, thank you for asking it!

The answer for me is three-fold. I don't believe the Islamic community has done enough to denounce these acts of terrorism. The main reason being that the Muslim community (not our leaders per se, but the average Muslim-Americans) are scared. In a time when habeas corpus is removed from the table and you are on the defensive all the time, it's easier, especially now, for some Muslims to just do their jobs, go home, and not cause a fuss. Now don't get me wrong we're out there fighting the good fight. Mosques throughout the country (and world) have denounced terrorism completely as an act against Islamic law, teaching and scripture. Can we do more? Yes. We're becoming more and more unified and efficient as a community. We're starting our own T.V. stations/channels (Bridges T.V. should be free for ALL Comcast customers), newspapers, internet sites. We're holding community out reach programs on a daily basis now. We're getting there...it's just a really steep battle.

Two, I volunteered at several Mosques and continue to this day and sometimes it's near impossible to get the media to listen. It's VERY difficult; there is a huge media biased that is VERY difficult to crack and when we do they cherry pick sound bites, clips and news to cover. Directly after 9/11 the coverage was descent, but fell very quickly. And when the constant coverage of a "Muslim" is to blow himself up there is a biased there that we're trying to break. You really don't hear a lot about the good that Muslims are doing in American communities, especially the inner-city/rural communities. For instance, Umma Community Clinic (http://www.ummaclinic.org/) is a free medical clinic, 12 years strong, that was set up by young Muslim Medical Students in Downtown L.A to serve the impoverished community there.

Lastly, I don't think the entire Islamic community should be held responsible for the actions of a few in power, BUT I do believe that as Muslims we should, and MUST, stand up to this barbarism that lays claim to our name. Our problem is, unlike the WestBoro extremism, is that the World is at war with these terrorist groups, so we're constantly bombarded with images of the "enemy" in broad strokes and it's an up mountain battle for us.

[BatSpider]

This is the focus of the thread and I invite all to watch these 3 parts and the remaining 3 of the set.
I second that :yay:

[raybia]

This is a good question actually, thank you for asking it!

The answer for me is three-fold. I don't believe the Islamic community has done enough to denounce these acts of terrorism. The main reason being that the Muslim community (not our leaders per se, but the average Muslim-Americans) are scared. In a time when habeas corpus is removed from the table and you are on the defensive all the time, it's easier, especially now, for some Muslims to just do their jobs, go home, and not cause a fuss. Now don't get me wrong we're out there fighting the good fight. Mosques throughout the country (and world) have denounced terrorism completely as an act against Islamic law, teaching and scripture. Can we do more? Yes. We're becoming more and more unified and efficient as a community. We're starting our own T.V. stations/channels (Bridges T.V. should be free for ALL Comcast customers), newspapers, internet sites. We're holding community out reach programs on a daily basis now. We're getting there...it's just a really steep battle.

Two, I volunteered at several Mosques and continue to this day and sometimes it's near impossible to get the media to listen. It's VERY difficult; there is a huge media biased that is VERY difficult to crack and when we do they cherry pick sound bites, clips and news to cover. Directly after 9/11 the coverage was descent, but fell very quickly. And when the constant coverage of a "Muslim" is to blow himself up there is a biased there that we're trying to break. You really don't hear a lot about the good that Muslims are doing in American communities, especially the inner-city/rural communities. For instance, Umma Community Clinic (http://www.ummaclinic.org/) is a free medical clinic, 12 years strong, that was set up by young Muslim Medical Students in Downtown L.A to serve the impoverished community there.

Lastly, I don't think the entire Islamic community should be held responsible for the actions of a few in power, BUT I do believe that as Muslims we should, and MUST, stand up to this barbarism that lays claim to our name. Our problem is, unlike the WestBoro extremism, is that the World is at war with these terrorist groups, so we're constantly bombarded with images of the "enemy" in broad strokes and it's an up mountain battle for us.

Not that your comments need it, but I do concur! With some people Muslims cannot win. If we don't speak out enough then we are guilty of silently supporting terrorism and if we do speak out, then we are pandering.

I say we do need to speak out against all wrong doing in a variety of ways but not for the benefit of our critics but for the benefit of humanity.

[Superman4ever]

Not that your comments need it, but I do concur! With some people Muslims cannot win. If we don't speak out enough then we are guilty of silently supporting terrorism and if we do speak out, then we are pandering.

I say we do need to speak out against all wrong doing in a variety of ways but not for the benefit of our critics but for the benefit of humanity.

YES! Absolutely. I agree 100%, I think it's time we become outspoken for the betterment of, not only our community, but for humanity and society as a whole.

Oh, if we could only abide by the Prophet's (PBUH) last sermon.

All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black, nor a black has any superiority over a white- except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a Muslim, which belongs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly. Do not therefor, do injustice to yourselves.

The problem with us is that many don't really realize how large and wonderful our brotherhood can and should be until after they visit the Hajj.

Moreover, for the poster that said that Islam allows women to be treated ill-fully, instead of acknowledging the problem as a cultural faults, the Prophet dedicated a big part of his final sermon to the rights and treatment of women:


O People
It is true that you have certain rights in regard to your women, but they also have rights over you. Remember that you have taken them as your wives, only under Allah's trust and with His permission. If they abide by your right then to them belongs the right to be fed and clothed in kindness. Do treat you women well and be kind to them, for they are your partners and committed helpers. And it is your right that they do not make friends with anyone of whom you do not approve, as well as never to be unchaste.

Just to avoid controversy the last part doesn't mean we get to enforce our will on women, it means that husbands have a duty to protect their wives, since they protect us.

[Memphis Slim]

The recent controversy of whether or not Obama was Muslim rubbed me the wrong way as being a Muslim and being American are not compatible.

I offer these 3 of 6 parts by Faheem Shuiabe, a student of Imam W. Deen Mohammed, leader of the largest Muslim community in America.


XMDXZQQ_GQ0&feature=related

AshUH3TZjxA&NR=1


ylKiyO_xrIU&feature=related


Some Muslims want Sharia Law in this country. Do you agree with that? And if so, do you think it is compatible with a democratic society. Does it promote the pursuit of happiness and equality?

[raybia]

Some Muslims want Sharia Law in this country. Do you agree with that? And if so, do you think it is compatible with a democratic society. Does it promote the pursuit of happiness and equality?

Which Muslims are you speaking of?

There is no need to have Sharia law in the United States of America.
The Constitution of the U.S. is perfectly compatible with the principles of Islam and is the basis of the American democratic way of life and doesn't need to be tampered with or replace.

Any Muslim living in America who has a clear understanding of their Quran would do everything
in their power to protect the Constitution from those who seek to violate it and make it null and void.

Any American who has an understanding of the Constitution would band together and have those who have violated it AND those who attempt to do charged and tried, whether foreign or domestic.

[Superman4ever]

Some Muslims want Sharia Law in this country. Do you agree with that? And if so, do you think it is compatible with a democratic society. Does it promote the pursuit of happiness and equality?

Firstly, our religion states that we can live within a country and obey it's laws and our laws. However, if the country has a law that goes against Islamic principles then we should stand up and speak out against such injustices, BUT the United States to the best of my knowledge doesn't have ANY laws that contradict Islamic law, code or ethics.

Actually you'd probably find more Muslims defending the United States Constitution, as is, then some of your Southern Baptist friends who seem to think of it as a rough draft rather than a binding contract and, as such, the highest law in the land!

Moreover, sharia law allows the inclusion of "secular" laws if the Islamic community agrees upon it and is seen as a positive for the community. A good example of this would be coffee. When coffee was introduced to the Middle-East Islamic Jurist didn't know how to categorize the drink (whether Halal, AKA Kosher; or as Haram, outlawed or sinful). It fell within Islamic principle and guidelines as being non-alcoholic AND was not seen as a bodily harm. So they let the Islamic community vote and since the Islamic community as a whole and the Jurist saw it as a new and non-harmful innovation it was accepted Halal.

Again, ALL laws and principalities within the United States and specified by/within the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are supported by The Qur'an and Sharia Law.

I thank you for your question.

[Superman4ever]

I thought this video was so cute. However, near the end the guy that says he's not ashamed of his virginity does kinda seem, embarrassed, lol. :O

Yvb_pLnWTkc

[Gamma Ray]

I have several Muslim friends in college. They're casual friends, but friends nonetheless. They're all very intelligent and have pretty big career goals. They all acknowledge Israel's right to exist, and we have had discussions about why it's so difficult for everyone to live together in peace. We never come up with answers, but if the children in the Middle East were being brought up the same way my friends were, the problem would resolve itself after this generation died out. But the fact is they're not being brought up like that. The tactics being used in basic education of young Muslim children in the Middle East mirror those used by the Nazis. Whether it be at school in their textbooks or at home on TV (forgot the name, but there was a show where a puppet martyred himself). It cannot be denied that radical Islam is a huge problem not just for Israel, but for the entire world. This to me is unacceptable and is, what I feel, skews peoples perception of the Muslim faith everywhere else.

[Prefix]

I live in the UK, and there is a significant muslim population in my city. As such, I grew up with a lot of muslim kids, especially during secondary school. In the first year of secondary school, all the kids just played with each other, but as we got older, the muslim kids distanced themselves from the rest. I don't know why they would have done this. i still made an effort to be indiscriminate towards them, but it was obvious they would not treat me with respect. Why would this be the case?

[kang604]

In many middle eastern countries these kinds of people in addition to homosexuals and other law breakers are killed in public executions.

ummm... KKK?

white christian supremacists attacking and murdering blacks in the US?


i am not muslim but i find it disturbing how the American media have automatically associated Muslim with "terrorist".

As if Barack "Hussein" Obama is so much worse than just Barack Obama.

[Superman4ever]

I live in the UK, and there is a significant muslim population in my city. As such, I grew up with a lot of muslim kids, especially during secondary school. In the first year of secondary school, all the kids just played with each other, but as we got older, the muslim kids distanced themselves from the rest. I don't know why they would have done this. i still made an effort to be indiscriminate towards them, but it was obvious they would not treat me with respect. Why would this be the case?

Do you live in Oldham or near there by any chance? Oldham was being divided racially, and became very segregated in the 80's. It's a lower-class area from my understanding and was the hub of many newly migrated Muslims, mainly from Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. At one point in time Muslims (this went on from the 80's to mid 90's) were angered by how they were treated by the community, unemployment rates were 33% (among that Muslim community) and that void lead to self-destructive behavior and anger.

Anyway, does it excuse there actions? Absolutely NOT under any regard.

I don't know what happened to you, or the situation, and I can't speak for the teens that mistreated you. It could just be a case of teens being teens.

I went to a predominantly Muslim H.S. here in Dearborn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fordson_High_School), mainly Lebanese, and they weren't all saints. I HATED high school, in fact. It was like any other HS. You had the jocks, the nerds, the cheerleaders, the prom queens. We had a prom, home coming, rallies...blah, blah. Our Valedictorian, Fatima, had a 4.5 GPA and is now a Pediatric Resident at UM hospital. So there's good, bad and average people everywhere in all cultures, no matter creed, gender or race.

[Prefix]

Do you live in Oldham or near there by any chance? Oldham was being divided racially, and became very segregated in the 80's. It's a lower-class area from my understanding and was the hub of many newly migrated Muslims, mainly from Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. At one point in time Muslims (this went on from the 80's to mid 90's) were angered by how they were treated by the community, unemployment rates were 33% (among that Muslim community) and that void lead to self-destructive behavior and anger.

Anyway, does it excuse there actions? Absolutely NOT under any regard.

I don't know what happened to you, or the situation, and I can't speak for the teens that mistreated you. It could just be a case of teens being teens.

I went to a predominantly Muslim H.S. here in Dearborn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fordson_High_School), mainly Lebanese, and they weren't all saints. I HATED high school, in fact. It was like any other HS. You had the jocks, the nerds, the cheerleaders, the prom queens. We had a prom, home coming, rallies...blah, blah. Our Valedictorian, Fatima, had a 4.5 GPA and is now a Pediatric Resident at UM hospital. So there's good, bad and average people everywhere in all cultures, no matter creed, gender or race.
I live in Peterborough, only left school a year ago, and the muslim population reached its high level in the last 6 years.

[MaskedManJRK]

Didn't know that detail that the Muslim congressman (who's name slips my mind) swore in on a Quaran beloning to Jefferson. Interesting.

[Superman4ever]

Didn't know that detail that the Muslim congressman (who's name slips my mind) swore in on a Quaran beloning to Jefferson. Interesting.

Actually, Jefferson bought that edition of the Qur'an as a means to better understand national law. (http://www.iviews.com/articles/articles.asp?ref=IV0701-3221&p=1) The book of standards at the time was called Of the Law and Nature and Nations by Frieherr von Pufendorf. The good Frieherr quoted the Qur'an many times in his book, and so Jefferson bought a copy of the Qur'an to better understand law.

Jefferson acquired his Qur'an not long after the injustice of the Stamp Act had forced him to question seriously the heritage of English constitutional law and to seek ultimate answers in the ideas of natural law and natural rights. Given the fact that he was devoting most of his time to the study of law, Jefferson could justify studying the Qur'an simultaneously because it, too, was a law book. Being, as Muslims believe, the revealed word of God, the Qur'an not only constitutes the sacred scripture of the Islamic faith, it also forms the supreme source of Islamic law. Wanting to broaden his legal studies as much as possible, Jefferson found the Qur'an well worth his attention.

http://www.iviews.com/articles/articles.asp?ref=IV0701-3221&p=1

That's pretty cool!

[Space Moose]

Oh noes!!! Muslims on the Hype!!!

[Super_Ludacris]

Good thread,

I remember that story about the muslim congressmen. He was once on Fox News and the reporter was mad ignorant pretty much asking him if he was a terrorist, which struck me as a new level of retardedness.

Ive been greatful of the fact I was an expat in the middle east for a few years growing up. Made a ton of good friends who I know to this day, got to see another perpsective (good and bad) and really saw a lot of similarties between there and here.

[BatSpider]

Oh noes!!! Muslims on the Hype!!!
Shut up :cmad:

[Space Moose]

Shut up :cmad:
:woot:

[Superman4ever]

Shut up :cmad:

I think he was kidding. :O

[BatSpider]

:woot:
WTF :huh:
I think he was kidding. :O
Oops

[Backdrifter]

Damn it I was going to go to sleep, I gotta get up at 6AM for rounds.

I'll refer to your last comment first.



Did you not read my post? Firstly, this hadith is well known/refereed to throughout the Islamic community as a "weak" hadith with only one chain of command (the more reliable ones have 4 or more, preferably) and, therefore, via Islamic Jurisprudence CANNOT be used as a justification for the death penalty. Ergo the "kill them" is NOT a command. THUS, since it is only interpreted once, by ONE witness, Islamic jurist only justify it's use in the case of extreme HIGH TREASON. Meaning the "apostate" has to declare war on Muslims AND kill them.

Lastly, and more importantly, there is NO reason or evidence that proves that the Prophet Muhammad or any of his companions ever compelled individuals to embrace Islam, NOR did they EVER sentence anyone for simply renouncing their faith. EVER!

Again, the "apostates" that specific hadith is referring to, like I mentioned earlier, are the ones that are FIGHTING and KILLING Muslims unjustly.

I stated in my previous post that there are 14 different types of "apostates" it's not a clear cut case.

Finally, you conveniently forget that the Qur'an doesn't give a worldly punishment for "apostasy" ONLY that G-d will deal with them, if you will, AND that the Qur'an CLEARLY and repeatedly affirms the freedom of conscious and freedom of faith and worship.

http://www.islamonline.net/English/contemporary/2006/04/article02.shtml

I'll get to your other quotes tomorrow morning. Why is it that ALL Islamic threads have to turn into a forum for hate speech? The original intent of this thread was to convey that Muslim-Americans ARE just as American as anyone else who claims that honor. We are NOT second class citizens, traitors or haters of freedom. In fact quite the opposite.

Many of us, especially us migrants from tyrannical regimes CHOOSE to come to the United States to escape persecution.

I understand what you are saying about the Hadith, but regardless of what you say, you can not simply deny that many, many countries with state sponsored Islam have embraced that concept whole heartedly and many Muslims around the world agree with it. I have read a number of stories by converts from Islam to Christianity whose own friends and family have tried to kill them or turn them over to the police. This is a simple reality and they justify it with this quote.

Your comment about Muhammad is simply not true. Muhammad was a military leader and lead his people into several battles forcing his religion onto people. In fact, he had little to do with war until he 'recieved' his messages and created his new religion. He spent the last 10 years of his life leadng Muslim armies and introducing jihad, shahada, central leadership, assassination, and more. This is how Islam was spread. I apologize if my words seem harsh, but I don't understand how you can ignore these facts about the history of Islam and its creator.

I am not spreading a message of hate. I am merely stating historical facts about the history of Islam. Please do not relegate this to hate speech. I am merely challenging the picture of Islam and Muhammad that you have painted that history shows is not correct.

[Superman4ever]

I understand what you are saying about the Hadith, but regardless of what you say, you can not simply deny that many, many countries with state sponsored Islam have embraced that concept whole heartedly and many Muslims around the world agree with it. I have read a number of stories by converts from Islam to Christianity whose own friends and family have tried to kill them or turn them over to the police. This is a simple reality and they justify it with this quote.

Your comment about Muhammad is simply not true. Muhammad was a military leader and lead his people into several battles forcing his religion onto people. In fact, he had little to do with war until he 'recieved' his messages and created his new religion. He spent the last 10 years of his life leadng Muslim armies and introducing jihad, shahada, central leadership, assassination, and more. This is how Islam was spread. I apologize if my words seem harsh, but I don't understand how you can ignore these facts about the history of Islam and its creator.

I am not spreading a message of hate. I am merely stating historical facts about the history of Islam. Please do not relegate this to hate speech. I am merely challenging the picture of Islam and Muhammad that you have painted that history shows is not correct.


You're NOT stating ANY historical fact about the history of Islam. It is merely your perception of Islam. Secondly, I have questioned Islam and Muhammad, MANY times, because of people like you, but, more importantly, because my faith allows me to question and expand and in doing so my faith has strengthened 1000-folds. Why? Because I discovered EVERYTHING that you guys have said has been false and prejudice. EVERYTHING!

Do you actually think that you're the first person to attack me as a Muslim? To attack my faith? To challenge me?

You said earlier that Muhammad allowed for the killing of Apostates, I've shown above that that was NOT true. ONLY people who were witnessed as being MURDERERS were allowed to be executed ONLY after a trial.

And the notion that Muhammad (PBUH) lead the Islamic community to war shows JUST how ignorant your brainwashed logic is. For 12 years after Muhammad received the Holy word the Muslims were persecuted under the harshest circumstances imagined and it was not until they were backed in a corner that G-d revealed the first verses to defend themselves. The Muslims were our numbered, by some figure 5 to 1, they were on the verge of complete annihilation and had NO choice but to DEFEND themselves.

America can defend itself right?

Moreover, the fact that you know "many" Muslim converts who were persecuted, is irrelevant. I KNOW many many many more (take your figure and multiply it by 100) who were persecuted and became STRONGER Muslims. More faithful. I can't help but think how pathetic your comments are due to their absolute arrogance.

I challenge you to open your heart and challenge your view of Islam and Muhammad. How can you have the arrogance to believe that EVERYTHING a Muslim says as a deluded lie, but everything you believe, VOID of any history or fact, as right, and then ask me to challenge my view?

[Superman4ever]

...and introducing jihad...

LMAO! Muhammad introduced Jihad? First of all you don't know what Jihad is, but...


Luke 19-27 (New American Standard bible)
"But these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them in my presence."


King James Bible
But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

http://bible.cc/luke/19-27.htm

Mathew 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

" He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one." (Luke 22:36)

Your understanding of Jihad and Islam is COMPLETELY warped, but what's more disturbing, and attests to how lame your arguments and logic are, is that you don't even know your own bible. Yet you attack me for not "knowing" my religion and it's history? Are you kidding? I not only know my religion, my Qur'an and my Islamic Legacy...I know yours.

It's my duty as a Muslim to know the holy books of our Christian and Jewish Brothers to build bridges and communities of understanding, brotherhood and love. What are you and your prejudice hate doing?

[Backdrifter]

Luke 19:27... this a verse from a parable. Jesus often spoke in parables saying to those who listen "He who has ears, let him hear." (Matthew 11:15) Jesus did not order anyone to ever be killed in his name. Jesus came to give life not to take it. He healed hundreds and most likely thousands of people when he walked the earth. He even brought many people back from the dead. He never raised a sword to anyone. He never lead any armies into battle. His message was peace and love and he spread it with those very attributes.

The following is the entire parable. A parable is story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle.
The Parable of the Ten Minas

11While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once. 12He said: "A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king and then to return. 13So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas.[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2019&version=31#fen-NIV-25736a)]'Put this money to work,' he said, 'until I come back.' 14"But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, 'We don't want this man to be our king.'
15"He was made king, however, and returned home. Then he sent for the servants to whom he had given the money, in order to find out what they had gained with it.
16"The first one came and said, 'Sir, your mina has earned ten more.'
17" 'Well done, my good servant!' his master replied. 'Because you have been trustworthy in a very small matter, take charge of ten cities.'
18"The second came and said, 'Sir, your mina has earned five more.'
19"His master answered, 'You take charge of five cities.'
20"Then another servant came and said, 'Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth. 21I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow.'
22"His master replied, 'I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? 23Why then didn't you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?'
24"Then he said to those standing by, 'Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.'
25" 'Sir,' they said, 'he already has ten!'
26"He replied, 'I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away. 27But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me." - Luke 19:11-27



The following is a explanation of the parable so you may understand exactly what Jesus was saying

The final parable of the Jerusalem journey highlights the disciple's stewardship in the interim between Jesus' death and return. It continues the theme of his preparation of the disciples for life after his departure. His servants must recognize that the consummation of the kingdom is yet future and they are accountable for their service in the meantime. Those who reject Jesus' kingship face judgment, whether they reject that kingship directly or view the King as harsh rather than gracious.
The motive for this parable is explicit. Jesus wishes to correct the view that because he was near Jerusalem the kingdom of God was going to appear at once. Of course what is meant here is the decisive demonstration of regal authority that Jews expected of Messiah and that the disciples were still asking about in Acts 1:6. Luke wishes to steer attention away from that event to the responsibility that disciples have in the meantime.
The story is simple enough. A man goes to a faraway land to receive a kingdom. This portion of the parable portrays Jesus' departure in resurrection to receive the kingdom at the side of the Father, a major Lukan theme (Lk 24:26; Acts 2:36; 5:30-31; 7:55-56; 13:33-34; 17:31; Stein 1992:473). In the meantime certain servants associated with Jesus are called together and given a mina each--about one hundred drachmas, or three months' average wage. They are to trade with the money and are responsible to make it grow in value. Some of his subjects, however, want nothing to do with the leader and send a delegation to ask that this one not be chosen to rule. Those who refuse the rule are the Jewish leaders, while the servants represent all those who tie themselves to Jesus.
The servants need to be carefully described, since a key to the interpretation of the passage lies in their identity. Some assume that these are all genuine believers because Jesus calls the servants to himself. If so, the rejection of the third servant would mean either loss of rewards upon entrance to heaven or loss of salvation--a choice that generally depends on one's theological tradition. But the third servant's attitude is crucial to an understanding the parable. This third servant views the owner as harsh, even a lawbreaker, by reaping that which he does not sow (Josephus Against Apion 2.31 216). He would exact large sums of money from those who serve him. He would run over people. Now this servant's portrait of the owner suggests an attitude contrary to trust and faith. Though this man serves the master, he is not really allied to him. The failure of his stewardship is no surprise in light of this attitude. This servant represents a person who has only an association with the Master. Perhaps the individual illustrated here is Judas.
The parable's story is simple. The master returns to evaluate the stewardship of his servants. The first servant has gained ten minas for his one, a 1,000 percent increase. This man has been totally faithful. The reward is more service--responsibility for ten cities. The second servant is also faithful. A 500 percent increase is his contribution. He gets five cities. In contrast, the third servant has done nothing to invest his money, for reasons noted above. He does not think the king is worth laboring for, because the king would rob him. Commendation and more service follow faithfulness, but what follows such a harsh rejection of stewardship?
The master accuses the man of hypocrisy. If he knew the king was a hard man, then he should have at least put the money in the bank so it could earn a little interest. At least there would have been something to collect! So Jesus calls this slave wicked (porneros). His mina goes to the first servant, who has been faithful. The third servant ends up with nothing. As Jesus says in conclusion, "But as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away." These words echo 8:18. It matters little whether this conclusion is the word of the master or Jesus' commentary, a detail that is disputed; the point is the same either way. Those who have nothing receive nothing. In fact, they lose whatever they thought they had. The stubborn slave is the "odd man out" who appears in so many of Jesus' parables (Mt 13:29-30, 41, 49-50; 18:32-34; 22:11-13; 25:41). Some are associated with Jesus only superficially, and their lack of faith will be revealed at the evaluation of their life's stewardship.
In contrast, the faithful are rewarded: "To everyone who has, more will be given." Jesus acknowledges faithfulness with commendation and more service. To use the Lord's gifts is to prepare to serve him further.


Mathew 10:34 is also taken out of context. The quoted verse is taken from when Christ sent out the 12 disciples to preach in his name, to drive out demons, and to heal the sick and the diseased. He explains to his disciples that his message will upset other Jews, especially teachers of the law. He warns them that people will try to hand them over to the law.

22All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. 23When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes. Matthew 10:22-23

Now the FULL quote of what Jesus said and now read in context does not imply that Jesus is bringing a literal sword, but the Word of God which is described in Ephesians 6:10-17.

The Armor of God

10Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 11Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes. 12For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. 13Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. 14Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 15and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 16In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 17Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. 18And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the saints.- Ephesians 6:10-17

Now finally, Luke 22:36. Let's put the verse in the context of the Bible. Jesus and the disciples are celebrating the Feast of Unleavened Bread or The Passover recognizing when the Angel of Death passed over Egypt during the times of Moses and the Israelites under the yoke of Pharaoh. It is no coincidence that Christ is going to be arrested on this day. The Passover event itself is a precursor to the coming of Christ. He was called the Lamb of God by John the Baptist (John 1:29) The Israelites were told by Moses from God to slay a spotless Lamb and dress the door posts of their houses with its blood to avoid the angel of death coming and taking the first born son. Later on God would have the Hebrews slay spotless lambs as offerings for their sins for the tabernacle and later the great Temple. Christ is Lamb of God.

Now onto the entire passage:

The Last Supper

7Then came the day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed. 8Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, "Go and make preparations for us to eat the Passover." 9"Where do you want us to prepare for it?" they asked.
10He replied, "As you enter the city, a man carrying a jar of water will meet you. Follow him to the house that he enters, 11and say to the owner of the house, 'The Teacher asks: Where is the guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?' 12He will show you a large upper room, all furnished. Make preparations there."
13They left and found things just as Jesus had told them. So they prepared the Passover.
14When the hour came, Jesus and his apostles reclined at the table. 15And he said to them, "I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. 16For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God."
17After taking the cup, he gave thanks and said, "Take this and divide it among you. 18For I tell you I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes."
19And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me."
20In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you. 21But the hand of him who is going to betray me is with mine on the table. 22The Son of Man will go as it has been decreed, but woe to that man who betrays him." 23They began to question among themselves which of them it might be who would do this.
24Also a dispute arose among them as to which of them was considered to be greatest. 25Jesus said to them, "The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who exercise authority over them call themselves Benefactors. 26But you are not to be like that. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves. 27For who is greater, the one who is at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who is at the table? But I am among you as one who serves. 28You are those who have stood by me in my trials. 29And I confer on you a kingdom, just as my Father conferred one on me, 30so that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
31"Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift you[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2022;&version=31;#fen-NIV-25887a)] as wheat. 32But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers."
33But he replied, "Lord, I am ready to go with you to prison and to death."
34Jesus answered, "I tell you, Peter, before the rooster crows today, you will deny three times that you know me."
35Then Jesus asked them, "When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?"
"Nothing," they answered.
36He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. 37It is written: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors'[b (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2022;&version=31;#fen-NIV-25893b)]; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment."
38The disciples said, "See, Lord, here are two swords."
"That is enough," he replied. - Luke 22:7-38



Again, Christ is referring to the word of God as a sword. The disciples take Jesus' remarks literally and incorrectly. They note that they have two swords, but Jesus cuts off the discussion. Something is not right, but it is too late to discuss it. As the arrest will show, they have misunderstood. They draw swords then, but Jesus stops their defense in its tracks. He is not telling them to buy swords to wield in physical battle. They will have to provide for themselves and fend for themselves, but not through the shedding of blood. They are being drawn into a great cosmic struggle, and they must fight with spiritual swords and resources. The purchase of swords serves only to picture this coming battle. This fight requires special weapons (Eph 6:10-18).

I know quite a good deal about the Bible and the life of our savior Jesus Christ. He was fully God and fully man. He was the creator of the universe, but came humbly teaching a gospel of love and peace. He never raised a sword or killed any. He came to give life and to give HIS life for ours. He died on the cross for our transgressions and was raised from the dead.

15For this people's heart has become calloused;
they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.'[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2013;&version=31;#fen-NIV-23555a)] 16But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. 17For I tell you the truth, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it. - Matthew 13:15-17

[raybia]

Luke 19:27... this a verse from a parable. Jesus often spoke in parables saying to those who listen "He who has ears, let him hear." (Matthew 11:15) Jesus did not order anyone to ever be killed in his name. Jesus came to give life not to take it. He healed hundreds and most likely thousands of people when he walked the earth. He even brought many people back from the dead. He never raised a sword to anyone. He never lead any armies into battle. His message was peace and love and he spread it with those very attributes.

The following is the entire parable. A parable is story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle.


The following is a explanation of the parable so you may understand exactly what Jesus was saying



Mathew 10:34 is also taken out of context. The quoted verse is taken from when Christ sent out the 12 disciples to preach in his name, to drive out demons, and to heal the sick and the diseased. He explains to his disciples that his message will upset other Jews, especially teachers of the law. He warns them that people will try to hand them over to the law.



Now the FULL quote of what Jesus said and now read in context does not imply that Jesus is bringing a literal sword, but the Word of God which is described in Ephesians 6:10-17.



Now finally, Luke 22:36. Let's put the verse in the context of the Bible. Jesus and the disciples are celebrating the Feast of Unleavened Bread or The Passover recognizing when the Angel of Death passed over Egypt during the times of Moses and the Israelites under the yoke of Pharaoh. It is no coincidence that Christ is going to be arrested on this day. The Passover event itself is a precursor to the coming of Christ. He was called the Lamb of God by John the Baptist (John 1:29) The Israelites were told by Moses from God to slay a spotless Lamb and dress the door posts of their houses with its blood to avoid the angel of death coming and taking the first born son. Later on God would have the Hebrews slay spotless lambs as offerings for their sins for the tabernacle and later the great Temple. Christ is Lamb of God.

Now onto the entire passage:



Again, Christ is referring to the word of God as a sword. The disciples take Jesus' remarks literally and incorrectly. They note that they have two swords, but Jesus cuts off the discussion. Something is not right, but it is too late to discuss it. As the arrest will show, they have misunderstood. They draw swords then, but Jesus stops their defense in its tracks. He is not telling them to buy swords to wield in physical battle. They will have to provide for themselves and fend for themselves, but not through the shedding of blood. They are being drawn into a great cosmic struggle, and they must fight with spiritual swords and resources. The purchase of swords serves only to picture this coming battle. This fight requires special weapons (Eph 6:10-18).

I know quite a good deal about the Bible and the life of our savior Jesus Christ. He was fully God and fully man. He was the creator of the universe, but came humbly teaching a gospel of love and peace. He never raised a sword or killed any. He came to give life and to give HIS life for ours. He died on the cross for our transgressions and was raised from the dead.

15For this people's heart has become calloused;
they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.'[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2013;&version=31;#fen-NIV-23555a)] 16But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. 17For I tell you the truth, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it. - Matthew 13:15-17

Backdrifter, this is off topic from the original post. The topic is essentially how the principles of Islam as presented in the Quran is compatible with American life.

Regardless of your feelings and lack of understanding about Islam and Muslims, we have a history and a place in this country as presented in the First amendment as in the United States, freedom of religion is a constitutionally guaranteed right.

If you want to debate the life of Muhammed and the history of the early age of Islam against the life sayings of Jesus as presented in the Bible then you can create a thread devoted to that theme but I'm going to have to ask you to keep your comments in the context of the first post and the you tube lectures presented.

Thank you,

raybia

[FaT_tONle]

I still can't believe a guy named Hussein is going to be the next president.

[raybia]

I still can't believe a guy named Hussein is going to be the next president.

Well it hasn't happen yet but it shouldn't be unbelievable after having presidents with the names Millard, Grover and Chester.

[Superman4ever]

Mathew 10:34 is also taken out of context.

Let's put the verse in the context of the Bible.

Again, Christ is referring to the word of God as a sword.

The disciples take Jesus' remarks literally and incorrectly.



It's funny how you ask me to put things back in "context". Yet, you took ALL of the quotes from the Qur'an and Hadiths and maliciously uprooted them contextually and historically speaking to serve your ill purpose but smite me by trying to correct me when I do the same.

Do you see the hypocrisy in what you're doing? How despicably desperate, aggressive and dishonorable your actions are?

[Space Moose]

I still can't believe a guy named Hussein is going to be the next president.
In a good or bad way?

[raybia]

The recent controversy of whether or not Obama was Muslim rubbed me the wrong way as being a Muslim and being American are not compatible.

I offer these 3 of 6 parts by Faheem Shuiabe, a student of Imam W. Deen Mohammed, leader of the largest Muslim community in America.


XMDXZQQ_GQ0&feature=related

AshUH3TZjxA&NR=1


ylKiyO_xrIU&feature=related

I will post parts 4-6 soon. For now, here is the focus of this thread.

[Whirlysplat]

Must not open mouth.....

[MetalloX]

Some Muslims want Sharia Law in this country. Do you agree with that? And if so, do you think it is compatible with a democratic society. Does it promote the pursuit of happiness and equality?

Maybe you're a stupid bigot ever think of that?

[Memphis Slim]

Which Muslims are you speaking of?

There is no need to have Sharia law in the United States of America.
The Constitution of the U.S. is perfectly compatible with the principles of Islam and is the basis of the American democratic way of life and doesn't need to be tampered with or replace.

Any Muslim living in America who has a clear understanding of their Quran would do everything
in their power to protect the Constitution from those who seek to violate it and make it null and void.

Any American who has an understanding of the Constitution would band together and have those who have violated it AND those who attempt to do charged and tried, whether foreign or domestic.


So...are you saying that Muslims that want sharia, don't understand the Koran?

[Memphis Slim]

Firstly, our religion states that we can live within a country and obey it's laws and our laws. However, if the country has a law that goes against Islamic principles then we should stand up and speak out against such injustices, BUT the United States to the best of my knowledge doesn't have ANY laws that contradict Islamic law, code or ethics.



Oh really?

So....homosexuals can live under Sharia? What would happenb to a woman caught in Adultery under Sharia?

Just curious?

[Mr Sparkle]

sharia Law, like the Old testament ( that you often use to justify your stance on homosexuality) have little to do with modern moderate muslims.
you would agree that if you lump moderates with extremists the same could be done to you and your beliefs to your disadvantage.

[Superhobo]

sharia Law, like the Old testament ( that you often use to justify your stance on homosexuality) have little to do with modern moderate muslims.
you would agree that if you lump moderates with extremists the same could be done to you and your beliefs to your disadvantage.

But..but god said...:csad:

[raybia]

So...are you saying that Muslims that want sharia, don't understand the Koran?

I'm saying that Muslims that want sharia in America don't understand the Constitution.

[raybia]

Oh really?

So....homosexuals can live under Sharia? What would happenb to a woman caught in Adultery under Sharia?

Just curious?

It depends on that countries version of Sharia law.

However while the Quran (the foundation of Sharia law) promotes a condemnation of homosexuality, no specific punishment is prescribed for those who commit it.

The Qur'an proclaims Islam as the "religion of nature," and sanctifies and encourages sexual intercourse within marriages. So Homosexuality was be considered unnatural.

The punishment lies within the lifestyle that is unnatural.

[Memphis Slim]

It depends on that countries version of Sharia law.

Why? Isn't all sharia law a good thing?


However while the Quran (the foundation of Sharia law) promotes a condemnation of homosexuality, no specific punishment is prescribed for those who commit it.

The Qur'an proclaims Islam as the "religion of nature," and sanctifies and encourages sexual intercourse within marriages. So Homosexuality was be considered unnatural.

The punishment lies within the lifestyle that is unnatural.


Really??
Is that why that young homosexual man in London, is scared to be deported back to middle east? Since the punishment is "in his lifestyle", he shouldn't be so afraid of being executed. Right?:huh:

And notice how you said the lifestyle is "unnatural"? What do you base that on? And no one has called you a bigot. Interesting.

[Super_Ludacris]

lol@ Islamphobia by some people.....

[raybia]

Don't think of me as a fool. I'm aware of the purpose of your line of questioning.


Socratic Method - The practice involves asking a series of questions surrounding a central issue, and answering questions of the others involved. Generally, this involves the defense of one point of view against another and is oppositional. The best way to 'win' is to make the opponent contradict themselves in some way that proves the inquirer's own point.




It depends on that countries version of Sharia law.

Why? Isn't all sharia law a good thing?

Sharia law is a good thing when its properly understood and applied. I think the best example of sharia law that I'm aware of is the U.S. Constitution.


However while the Quran (the foundation of Sharia law) promotes a condemnation of homosexuality, no specific punishment is prescribed for those who commit it.

The Qur'an proclaims Islam as the "religion of nature," and sanctifies and encourages sexual intercourse within marriages. So Homosexuality was be considered unnatural.

The punishment lies within the lifestyle that is unnatural.


Really??
Is that why that young homosexual man in London, is sacred to be deported back to middle east? Since the punishment is "in his lifestyle", he shouldn't be so afraid of being executed. Right?:huh:

The threat of punishment is a result of bigotry, ignorance, and fear. There is no Quranic basis for this man to be executed because of his homosexual lifestyle.



And notice how you said the lifestyle is "unnatural"? What do you base that on? And no one has called you a bigot. Interesting.

Of course I noticed as that is exactly what I tended to say. I'm a bigot cause I don't agree with homosexuality?

I don't advocate it but I would do everything in my power to protect people who practice that lifestyle from harm.

You should be the last people throwing out the "bigot" card. Everyone is aware of your Islamophobia...except maybe you...and that is the punishment for your lifestyle...living in fear.

[raybia]

Oh really?

So....homosexuals can live under Sharia? What would happenb to a woman caught in Adultery under Sharia?

Just curious?

It depends on that countries version of Sharia law.

Why? Isn't all sharia law a good thing?


However while the Quran (the foundation of Sharia law) promotes a condemnation of homosexuality, no specific punishment is prescribed for those who commit it.

The Qur'an proclaims Islam as the "religion of nature," and sanctifies and encourages sexual intercourse within marriages. So Homosexuality was be considered unnatural.

The punishment lies within the lifestyle that is unnatural.


Really??
Is that why that young homosexual man in London, is sacred to be deported back to middle east? Since the punishment is "in his lifestyle", he shouldn't be so afraid of being executed. Right?:huh:

And notice how you said the lifestyle is "unnatural"? What do you base that on? And no one has called you a bigot. Interesting.

I will also ask you to stay "on-topic" and to limit your questions to the context of the title and the first post with the videos of Imam Faheem Shuiabe of Oakland, Ca.

If you sincerely have questions for the purpose of furthering your knowledge and understanding of Islam then PM me and I will try my best to offer the resources to you which will assist you.

[raybia]

The recent controversy of whether or not Obama was Muslim rubbed me the wrong way as being a Muslim and being American are not compatible.

I offer these 3 of 6 parts by Faheem Shuiabe, a student of Imam W. Deen Mohammed, leader of the largest Muslim community in America.


XMDXZQQ_GQ0&feature=related

AshUH3TZjxA&NR=1


ylKiyO_xrIU&feature=related

Topic of discussion.

[Memphis Slim]

Don't think of me as a fool. I'm aware of the purpose of your line of questioning.


Socratic Method - The practice involves asking a series of questions surrounding a central issue, and answering questions of the others involved. Generally, this involves the defense of one point of view against another and is oppositional. The best way to 'win' is to make the opponent contradict themselves in some way that proves the inquirer's own point.




[quote=Memphis Slim;14386779]

Of course I noticed as that is exactly what I tended to say. I'm a bigot cause I don't agree with homosexuality?

Hey...that's what they call me for not agreeing with it. just sayin...

I don't advocate it but I would do everything in my power to protect people who practice that lifestyle from harm.

Me too. I don't want anyone hurt. But, if you think it's worng, you're a bigot on these message boards.

You should be the last people throwing out the "bigot" card. Everyone is aware of your Islamophobia...except maybe you...and that is the punishment for your lifestyle...living in fear.


I didn't call you a bigot. I asked you a question. Go back and read, Ray.

[Memphis Slim]

lol@ Islamphobia by some people.....
Yeah...the nerve.....

[Super_Ludacris]

Talking bout you clarence...

[Memphis Slim]

Talking bout you clarence...
I know..... :yay:

Clarence is a nice name.....nicer than some of the other names I've had hurled at me. Thanks!http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

[Mr Sparkle]

wow, awesomest thing is that Celldog keeps showing how much his beliefs are similar to Islam.
I'm sure the Irony is lost on him though.

[Memphis Slim]

wow, awesomest thing is that Celldog keeps showing how much his beliefs are similar to Islam.
I'm sure the Irony is lost on him though.

Naaah....just shows how ignorant of my beliefs you are.:yay:

But his thread is about Islam, right?

[Prefix]

Its about Muslim-American life, actually.

[raybia]

Naaah....just shows how ignorant of my beliefs you are.:yay:

But his thread is about Islam, right?

If you had watched the attached videos then you would know the subject matter of this thread.

That tells me that not only haven't you watched them, your interest for being in this thread is for another purpose.

[Memphis Slim]

If you had watched the attached videos then you would know the subject matter of this thread.

That tells me that not only haven't you watched them, your interest for being in this thread is for another purpose.


You sure are the artful Dodger aren't you??

[Prefix]

You sure are the artful Dodger aren't you??

He made a thread with a specific purpose that you aren't addressing. Not wanting to speak to you on those grounds hardly makes him the "artful Dodger"

[Mr Sparkle]

Naaah....just shows how ignorant of my beliefs you are.:yay:

But his thread is about Islam, right?

wow, you even made the "you" in bold and everything.
guess I'm undone.
haha.
aside from your similiraties with Islam I was thinking that, since you have not been "silenced" you don't get to complain about when someone questions your beliefs " this would never happen in a Muslim thread!!!" you would say, and stamp your feet all angry like a little elf.
but, hey, precedent set.

thanks, this thread has been a learning experience on every level, from the great Videos that I hope you get time to check out, to all this stuff about your similiraties to Islam, to the fact that you cn never complain about people questioning your beliefs anymore.

all in all great :up:

[raybia]

You sure are the artful Dodger aren't you??

This statement proves to me that your purpose is to sabotage this thread so the next perceived attempt at doing so will lead me to report you to a mod.

[raybia]

thanks, this thread has been a learning experience on every level, from the great Videos that I hope you get time to check out, to all this stuff about your similiraties to Islam, to the fact that you cn never complain about people questioning your beliefs anymore.

all in all great :up:


I'm glad that you found the videos informative.

Here are parts 4, 5 and 6 of the 6 part series.

H9Z9WdM9SJc


asuebyCGZtM&feature=related


5AkcI18Fx00&feature=related

[Superman4ever]

Naaah....just shows how ignorant of my beliefs you are.:yay:

But his thread is about Islam, right?

Actually it's not about Islam, it's about American Muslims. You and your buddy backdrafter came on here to flame and troll. We answered your questions with peaceful intent and did so respectfully yet you continue to throw hateful, twisted statements at us.

It really shows how "peaceful and loving" you people (radical types...NOT Christians in general) claim to be. Your own personal "faith" is purely based on hurting and discriminating others. In actuality you lack SO much faith in your own religion that you feel you need to berate and terrorize others, with different views and opinions. It's actually quite pathetic...

I would be ashamed, had my religion not compelled me to do so (and ask of me to be ever patient and loving), to call you brother.

EDIT: Just to clarify, my comments were ONLY aimed as Slim (and Radicals like him), NOT my fellow Christians. I've been VERY blessed in my life to know Christians and Jews who exemplify the teachings of their books, and the teachings of G-d, and whom I love dearly. However, Slim and radicals like him are a misguided bunch. I don't hate them, or wish them any thing but love and peace. I only ask that they open there hearts and rid the violent hate they hold in there hearts.

[Carcharodon]

You sure are the artful Dodger aren't you??http://apocalypse-tribe.com/rdfox/pot_kettle.jpg

[Dew k. Mosi]

Memphis Slim, stay out of this thread. Your intent here is transparently to cause issues. I am cutting it off here and now. Continue to post here and I will make certain your posting abilities are removed. Is that clear? You have obviously no ability to post in a respectful manner and raybia, Superman4ever, thank you for maintaining the higher ground here. If he continues, notify a mod at once, and he will be ejected from the site.

[Superman4ever]

Thank you Dew and Bella. Again we have no problem answering questions about Islam, but this thread's purpose is NOT for that. If you do have any questions, please feel free to PM me, I'd me more than happy to address any question.

[M.E.H.Z.E.B]

Count on any of us on the SHH! staff to help out whenever something like this happens. :up:

[Superman4ever]

Count on any of us on the SHH! staff to help out whenever something like this happens. :up:

Thanks everyone. It really means a lot.

OK, so before all the drama, I think we were talking about Thomas Jefferson and his copy of the Qur'an. I think, that is. :O

[Mr Sparkle]

question, do you think as Muslim americans, a separation of church and state in the US should be strictly enforced for ALL religions, were no implicit support of one faith or the other is apparent?

because I think the US government has been trying to appear pro-Muslim, but actually set back relations between the predominant religion and Islam.

am I wrong? is it a flawed perception?
not terribly related but I hope you will humor me.

[Superman4ever]

question, do you think as Muslim americans, a separation of church and state in the US should be strictly enforced for ALL religions, were no implicit support of one faith or the other is apparent?

because I think the US government has been trying to appear pro-Muslim, but actually set back relations between the predominant religion and Islam.

am I wrong? is it a flawed perception?
not terribly related but I hope you will humor me.

I absolutely believe there should be a separation of religion and state (not just in the US, even in the Mid-East). The reason being is that when religion enters politics, NO MATTER the religion, there is ALWAYS going to be someone whom will justify their means and intentions using scripture. Now that could be a good thing or a bad thing. Politics is too corrupt, IMO, to involve something as beautiful as religion.

There's a video that I'm going to PM you that talks about your second point. Anyone else that wants it can PM me (I don't want to verge off topic).

I personally DON'T want the US government to be Pro-anything, except the constitution, because if they're pro-anything they'd have to be anti-something else. I want the government to be neutral on religious ideals. I'd also LOVE it if lobbiest were removed from Washington (especially corporate). Preferably, I'd like the media to lighten up a little bit, but we as Muslims have a responsibility as well to dispel rumors, myths and lies.

[Malice]

Man you guys beat me to it.

[raybia]

Memphis Slim, stay out of this thread. Your intent here is transparently to cause issues. I am cutting it off here and now. Continue to post here and I will make certain your posting abilities are removed. Is that clear? You have obviously no ability to post in a respectful manner and raybia, Superman4ever, thank you for maintaining the higher ground here. If he continues, notify a mod at once, and he will be ejected from the site.

Count on any of us on the SHH! staff to help out whenever something like this happens. :up:

thank you for your support!

[raybia]

question, do you think as Muslim americans, a separation of church and state in the US should be strictly enforced for ALL religions, were no implicit support of one faith or the other is apparent?


First of all, I believe that most Americans do not properly understand the concept of "separation of church and state.

This phrase actually does not appear in the U.S. Constitution but it is identified with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…

Separation of church and state is the political and legal idea that government and religion should be separate, and not interfere in each other's affairs.

The original ideas of the separation of church and state was not that we won't have it to influence civil life but we also are not going to bar anyone because of the religion that they have, including the ability to hold public office.

Understanding the separation of church and state is complicated by the fact that we are using such a simplified phrase.

There is, after all, no single “church.” There are many religious organizations in the United States taking different names — church, synagogue, temple, Kingdom Hall and more. There are also many corporate bodies that do not adopt such religious titles but which are nevertheless controlled by religious organizations — for example, Catholic hospitals.

Also, there is no single “state.” Instead, there are multiple levels of government at the federal, state, regional and local level. There is also a great variety of government organizations — commissions, departments, agencies and more. These can all have different levels of involvement and different relationships with the aforementioned religious organizations.

This is important because it underscores the fact that, in the “separation of church and state,” we cannot be talking about a single, literal church and a single, literal state. Those terms are metaphors, meant to point to something larger.

The “church” should be construed as any organized religious body with its doctrines/dogmas and “state” should be construed as any governmental body, any government-run organization or any government-sponsored event.

Thus, a more accurate phrase than “separation of church and state” might be something like “separation of organized religion and civil authority,” because religious and civil authorities are not and should not be invested in the same people or organizations.


In practice, this means that civil authority cannot dictate to or control organized religious bodies. The state cannot tell religious bodies what to preach, how to preach or when to preach. Civil authority must exercise a “hands off” approach, neither helping nor hindering religion.

In reality we know that there is no separation between church and state as there are powerful religious lobbies that dictate to Washington and there are large corporations that dictate domestic and foreign policy are religious based and religious controlled. More common are private religious organizations acting through the government by having their own doctrines and beliefs codified into law or policy. FYI, none of these organizations are Islamic, at least not for the present.

So to answer your question, I do believe the correct concept of separation between church and state should be enforced because as of the moment it is not, if it has ever. The question is, "who is going to enforce it"?

Because IMO, the church is the one controlling the state.

[Mr Sparkle]

thank you for both your answers. :up:

[Superman4ever]

Damn Ray. Nice!

"...separation of organized religion and civil authority..." I love that!

[raybia]

Damn Ray. Nice!

"...separation of organized religion and civil authority..." I love that!

Thanks!

Separation of organized religion and civil authority but not of religious law and civil authority. The U.S. is a common law country.

Has anyone wondered of the origins of common law?



"Common law originally developed under the inquisitorial system in England during the 12th and 13th centuries,[11] as the collective judicial decisions that were based in tradition, custom and precedent.

Such forms of legal institutions and culture bear resemblance to those which existed historically in societies where precedent and custom have at times played a substantial role in the legal process, including Germanic law[12] and particularly Islamic law.[13]"



Several fundamental common law instutitions may have been adapted from similar legal instututions in Islamic law and jurisprudence, and introduced to England after the Norman conquest of England by the Normans, who conquered and inherited the Islamic legal administration of the Emirate of Sicily, and also by Crusaders during the Crusades. In particular, the "royal English contract protected by the action of debt is identified with the Islamic Aqd, the English assize of novel disseisin is identified with the Islamic Istihqaq, and the English jury is identified with the Islamic Lafif."[13] The English trust and agency institutions in common law were possible adapted from the Islamic Waqf and Hawala institutions respectively during the Crusades.[15][16] It is worth noting, however, that transferring property to another for the "use" of another developed largely in response to the requirements of feudal inheritance law. Trust law, in particular, is a creature of equity which derived from the parallel jurisdiction of the Lord Chancellor to decide matters independently to the Royal Courts.

Other English legal institutions such as "the scholastic method, the license to teach," the "law schools known as Inns of Court in England and Madrasas in Islam" and the "European commenda" (Islamic Qirad) may have also originated from Islamic law.[13] The methodology of legal precedent and reasoning by analogy (Qiyas) are also similar in both the Islamic and common law systems.[17] These similarities and influences have led some scholars to suggest that Islamic law may have laid the foundations for "the common law as an integrated whole".[13]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law


The laws of the U.S. do not have its basis or origins in secularism and the U.S. is definitely not a secular country regardless of the perception that is heavily hyped in the media.


IMO the U.S. has more in common with those Islamic countries that have or want shariah law as the basis for their government than anyone could have guessed.

For those of you who think this is ludicrous. Remember that copy of Thomas Jefferson's Quran that the Muslim congressman used to swear in on? Keep an open mind and consider this:

http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/transnational/vol11_2/white.pdf

Or in other words the U.S. is really a theocracy society posing as a secular one.

[Superman4ever]

For those of you who think this is ludicrous. Remember that copy of Thomas Jefferson's Quran that the Muslim congressman used to swear in on? Keep an open mind and consider this:

http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/transnational/vol11_2/white.pdf

Or in other words the U.S. is really a theocracy society posing as a secular one.

This is a wonderful article. It gives a nice history in laymen terms.

I'm almost done with it but found this particularly striking:



...Qur’an in Saudi
Arabia has many of the characteristics of the U.S. Constitution in
that it provides the ultimate authority for the law but does not
contain all the law. In both countries, law is developed outside of
the source. The law is usually developed in the spirit of the source,
but occasionally it is in breach of the source.

Secondly, the Qur’an is like the U.S. Constitution in that it
provides a power map. The Constitution provides the method for
lawmaking and it contains the directions for a system of
government. Similarly, the Qur’an contains the directions for a holy
life. It contains general principles that direct Islamic law. It is
widely accepted by citizens that the U.S. Constitution is the
foundation for the system of governance in the United States.
Similarly, it is well accepted among Muslims that the Qur’an is a
map for a holy life, forming a legal foundation and providing the
standards which should be used to discover the law.

[raybia]

This is a wonderful article. It gives a nice history in laymen terms.

I'm almost done with it but found this particularly striking:

I did too!

[raybia]

The recent controversy of whether or not Obama was Muslim rubbed me the wrong way as being a Muslim and being American are not compatible.

I offer these 3 of 6 parts by Faheem Shuiabe, a student of Imam W. Deen Mohammed, leader of the largest Muslim community in America.


XMDXZQQ_GQ0&feature=related

AshUH3TZjxA&NR=1


ylKiyO_xrIU&feature=related

I'm glad that you found the videos informative.

Here are parts 4, 5 and 6 of the 6 part series.

H9Z9WdM9SJc


asuebyCGZtM&feature=related


5AkcI18Fx00&feature=related

all 6 videos

[raybia]

bump

[raybia]

another bump;

[Venomfan]

ok i know this isn't exactly on topic with the thread, but obviously there are Muslims in here who will be able to answer my question.

i was wondering why it is against your religion to name things Mohammed?you know like that incident with the teacher naming the teddy bear that, and the dutch cartoon a year or so back. Why then is it appropriate to name a person Mohammed?

[raybia]

ok i know this isn't exactly on topic with the thread, but obviously there are Muslims in here who will be able to answer my question.

i was wondering why it is against your religion to name things Mohammed?you know like that incident with the teacher naming the teddy bear that, and the dutch cartoon a year or so back. Why then is it appropriate to name a person Mohammed?

There is nothing in the Quran, which is the foundation of the religion of Islam, nor in the tradition of the sayings or actions of Mohammed, the prophet of Islam, that prohibits naming something Mohammed.

With that said there were some Muslims who were upset by the naming of the teddy bear because they perceived it as a provocation.

The dutch cartoon was due to a caricature that was suppose to represent Mohammed drawn with a bomb as a turban. This act was again perceived as an attempt to represent both Mohammed and all Muslims as terrorists and Islam as a religion of war and violence.

So you might understand why some would be upset towards a religious figure who is highly revered and loved.

With that said, the best course of action should have been indifference to the two incidents and an awareness that, at least with the cartoon incidence, it was a possible set up to provoke the Muslim world in order to lend credence to the media hype of how violent Muslims suppose to be.

The Muslim world as a whole needs to be less emotional and more rational and in control so as not to let petty incidents of this nature take them out of the good character we are to possess and not to be a reactive people.

[Superman4ever]

While I'm for free speech, the dutch cartoons were nothing but a vile blatant racial attack. Should the artist be given death threats for it? No. He's expressing his free will and testament and has a right, under Qur'anic law, to do so. I think it's as pathetic a claim of free speech as claiming the Holy Prophet Jesus was gay...it's for attention and the sake of provocativeness. It's inappropriate and only serves as a claim to fame. We should peacefully protest and issue statements of disapproval. That's it.

Now the whole thing with the Bear and Muhammad was totally blown out of proportion by the Sudanese government. The bear was an innocent learning experience for, and by, the children of the class as a learning tool. Actually what the media failed to mention is that Muslims were against here detainment and played a crucial part in here release. It wasn't even the teacher's idea to name the bear "Muhammad"; a little boy in the class, whose name was "Muhammad" suggested the name and the kids loved it.

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1195032778567&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1195032799868&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1195032690673&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1195032857944&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout

Is there a problem, Islamicly speaking, with naming a teddy bear Muhammad? No. Not at all.

The Prophet was a wonderful man and I think these despicable actions, the rioting, in his name or in the name of Islam are tragic for us as an Islamic community. We should be doing MORE collectively to show what Islam is really about.

The truth is I'm kinda hard on my Islamic brethren because we have a history of greatness and lately we haven't lived up to our potential. We're getting there...

[raybia]

While I'm for free speech, the dutch cartoons were nothing but a vile blatant racial attack. Should the artist be given death threats for it? No. He's expressing his free will and testament and has a right, under Qur'anic law, to do so. I think it's as pathetic a claim of free speech as claiming the Holy Prophet Jesus was gay...it's for attention and the sake of provocativeness. It's inappropriate and only serves as a claim to fame. We should peacefully protest and issue statements of disapproval. That's it.

Now the whole thing with the Bear and Muhammad was totally blown out of proportion by the Sudanese government. The bear was an innocent learning experience for, and by, the children of the class as a learning tool. Actually what the media failed to mention is that Muslims were against here detainment and played a crucial part in here release. It wasn't even the teacher's idea to name the bear "Muhammad"; a little boy in the class, whose name was "Muhammad" suggested the name and the kids loved it.

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1195032778567&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1195032799868&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1195032690673&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1195032857944&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout

Is there a problem, Islamicly speaking, with naming a teddy bear Muhammad? No. Not at all.

The Prophet was a wonderful man and I think these despicable actions, the rioting, in his name or in the name of Islam are tragic for us as an Islamic community. We should be doing MORE collectively to show what Islam is really about.

The truth is I'm kinda hard on my Islamic brethren because we have a history of greatness and lately we haven't lived up to our potential. We're getting there...

Well said!

Maybe Muslims from that part of the world are beginning to learn.


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-film29mar29,1,571748.story

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4544952&page=1

[Superman4ever]

Well said!

Maybe Muslims from that part of the world are beginning to learn.


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-film29mar29,1,571748.story

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4544952&page=1

Alhamduillah, there hasn't been a major response yet to this silly film. I think we should do exactly what the Sheikh in the first link did. Inform the masses on what's REALLY said in the Qur'an.

The ABC link did a good job comparing the distortion and lies people like Wilder commit in order to serve their purposes.

In the film they show:

Verse from Fitna: (Chapter 8; Verse 6) Prepare for them whatever force and cavalry ye are able of gathering to strike terror into the hearts of the enemies of Allah and your enemies.

The Shiekh counters by:

The verse immediately after it says, "but if the enemy inclines toward peace, do thou also incline toward peace." Muslims are commanded to halt war immediately if the enemy shows signs of peace. Even in war, Muslims are instructed in the Quran to adhere to strict rules of engagement.

EDIT: I just realized that Chapter 8, verse 6 in the Qur'an doesn't even come close to stating what the movie claims. :huh: All the other verses use manipulative translations too. It's the same M.O. from these people...Wilder totally manipulates verse 4 from chapter 47 to make it sound like Muslims are instructed to kill ANY "unbeliever" without reason or mercy.

This is what he claims is said:
Verse from Fitna: (Chapter 47, Verse 4) Therefore, when ye meet the unbelievers, smite at their necks and when ye have caused a bloodbath among them [this part of the sentence does not even exist], bring a bond firmly on them.

What it really says is:

"Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight)...

[it's worthy to note that Wilder removed the "in fight" portion as this verse ONLY talks about actual war. Actual war involves many provisions that must be met, including but not limited to: When ALL peaceful means are completely exhausted and there is NO other choice; When a declaration has been made by a head of state; cannot be a war fought or declared based on difference of religion (it has to be a legitimate cause like oppression or injustice, and therefore "unbelievers" does not mean anyone who is not Muslim); and that civilians (young, old, women, child, injured, non-combatants, sick, handicapped, etc.) MUST not be harmed. That's a big part to leave out!]

...smite at their necks; [no mention of "bloodbath"; be swift in your attacks and do NOT torture or prolong your killer's death. Be fair, just and merciful for G-d has no mercy for those who show no mercy] At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them [when the war is over...NOT when you've caused a bloodbath, but when the Muslim community is safe from harm; the cause for war has been reversed, i.e. oppression is gone; the other side has given up and/or peace is declared], bind a bond firmly (on them); thereafter (is a time for) either generosity or ransom."

So after you defeat the people that were just about to kill you, do them NO harm and either release them safely or ransom them as a means for peace.

These are the same laws that the US follows in war, except we're a LOT more strict or are suppose to be anyways. The same humane laws that guide the Geneva conventions. If you've read the Geneva conventions it's the same thing.

[Eros]

I have something to say, but don't want to get banned.

[Superman4ever]

I have something to say, but don't want to get banned.

Say it! Slim was the one warned for harassment and trolling, so I don't think you'll get in trouble.

Or PM me.

[Arkady Rossovich]

bump

What does your signature say?:bomb:

[raybia]

What does your signature say?:bomb:

there is no God but God and Mohammed is his messenger

[Superman4ever]

The transliteration of Raybia's sig would be:

la ilaha (There is no god) ill allah (But G-d) Muhammadan (and Muhammad) rasul Allah (The Messenger of G-d).

[raybia]

Thanks! Yours is better more informative explanation.

[raybia]

this will be the last bump by me.

[Superman4ever]

Actually Ray, I wanted to get your perspective on what Shiekh Khalid Yasin says about Malcolm X. It starts at the 30 second mark.

u7iSoW5jhXw

Truth be told, I think he's a little hard on Brother Malcolm (given his life prior to Islam and the turbulence of the time), but he's right. He says that Malcolm didn't become a real Muslim until he went to the Hajj. Where thereafter he tried to build relationships with all people. He really was reformed after Mecca though.

Never have I witnessed such sincere hospitality and the overwhelming spirit of true brotherhood as practiced by people of all colors and races here in this Ancient Holy Land, the home of Abraham, Muhammad and all other prophets of the Holy Scriptures. For the past week, I have been utterly speechless and spellbound by the graciousness I see displayed all around me by people of all colors.

During the past eleven days here in the Muslim world, I have eaten from the same plate, drunk from the same glass, and slept in the same bed, (or on the same rug) -- while praying to the same God -- with fellow Muslims, whose eyes were the bluest of blue, whose hair was the blondest of blond, and whose skin was the whitest of white. And in the same words and in the actions and in the deeds of the 'white' Muslims, I felt the same sincerity that I felt among the black African Muslims of Nigeria, Sudan and Ghana.

That's the tragedy for me is Malcolm was taken when he really saw the true power, mercy and peace Islam offers.

I LOVE Sheikh Yasin though. He's a VERY powerful lecturer.

[Superman4ever]

Here's what else Sheikh Yasin says about Malcolm:

"Those of us who respect Malcolm who also respected the Nation of Islam… I was never a member of the Nation of Islam because I couldn’t accept the fact that they were saying God was a black man… I liked their habits. I liked their militant, I liked a lot of things I saw in them…. but we were all impressed when Malcolm said he had became an official Muslim, a universal Muslim, according to the doctrines of the Qur’an. When I read that as a non-Muslim I began to think about Islam" and that "When Malcolm return to America as El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz I was able to meet Malcolm on January 9th or 11th of that year 1964. Myself and another group of people sat on a roof in the cold, all night, because the streets were all ready full, we couldn’t get a place in the street. We found out where he was going to stand and we stood on that roof all night. When Malcolm came out at 8:30 that morning in Harlem, the streets of Harlem were full, it was almost like it was Hajj. There had to be 35 or 40,000 people filling the streets of Harlem just to see Malcolm - not Muslim, only people who had been moved by his inspiration. We were on the roof that day, we didn’t see him on the ground, but we saw him from the top and we felt we were the luckiest people. Malcolm saw us on that roof up their and asked one of his security guards to get us down and we got a chance to meet him and shake his hand that day. That is as much of a connection I had with Malcolm X the day that we met him and shook his hand. I don’t idolise him and I can only say that from a spiritual point of view he’s like a mentor, a spiritual father for us, so many of us who were contemporaries of Malcolm X we sort of call ourselves: Son of a Prince, because to us Malcolm, or El-Hajj Malik was a Prince.".

I love this story.

[Mr Sparkle]

To Be Honest the first thing I that caught my attention in the Malcom X movie was exactly this transformation, and while Spike Lee did take some rather wide liberties with the process, Malcom's own wittings are rather clear in his beliefs later in life, in fact it is widely perceived as the reason for his demise, as this inclusiveness was an inconvenience to the agenda put forth by the Nation.
In My opinion, and I think pretty much everyone knows this, I dislike organized religion, there's just a stench of corruption that Man brings into institutions that's just...well, almost impossible to avoid.
however, Islam to me, as well as Christianity has the potential to at least create spiritual awareness in the individual, that's why I hate it when people simply use religion as a tool to prop themselves up, as if on the winning team.
this has happened most often lately, and sadly the religion of Islam has been the target, due to some unfortunate geographic circumstances Islam is the new Judaism.
in the end, it falls upon both parties to improve relations between them, as I saw some idiots protesting the recent film by the dutch nutjob ( I can't remember his name) carrying signs that said " we condemn unbridled freedom of expression " :confused:
and on the other side, the dutch nutjob himself said " we must keep our dominant culture " both " valid " statements by each, with a good measure of " idiot retrograde " .
hopefully a middle ground can be found and we can learn that regardless of whom we worship or if we worship at all, the reality is that we all have the exact same goals in life, and we should spend more time looking at the similarities than the differences.

[Superman4ever]

and sadly the religion of Islam has been the target, due to some unfortunate geographic circumstances Islam is the new Judaism.


Y'know I've been thinking about this comment for 3 weeks now and I been obsessing with it actually. And I agree. In the sense that Muslims and Islam are attacked on a daily occurrence to rile the masses against it, much like passion plays in Nazi Germany or religious commentary of that era to ostracize the Jewish community in a corner. It really has!

For instance, when Bill Maher made his Pope comments, FOX"News" pounced on him and stated that free speech had a limit:

IchfBHLAMng

When the Danish cartoons, which ARE a MUCH more vile, hateful attack than what Bill Maher said (a hundred fold over), they were up-in-arms about how Muslims must accept free speech or leave. In fact MOST of the media said the same thing.

-bm-a9lBafc

Look how the tables have turned. NOW, it's not free speech...it's hate rhetoric. Now, it's vile, juvenile and unbecoming to society to support such ludicrous acts?

[Venomfan]

When the Danish cartoons, which ARE a MUCH more vile, hateful attack than what Bill Maher said (a hundred fold over), they were up-in-arms about how Muslims must accept free speech or leave. In fact MOST of the media said the same thing.

i haven't actually seen the cartoons, except what was shown in that video, which wasn't very visible, but what is so vile and hateful about them exactly? from my understanding so far they are just pictures of Mohammed?

[raybia]

Y'know I've been thinking about this comment for 3 weeks now and I been obsessing with it actually. And I agree. In the sense that Muslims and Islam are attacked on a daily occurrence to rile the masses against it, much like passion plays in Nazi Germany or religious commentary of that era to ostracize the Jewish community in a corner. It really has!

For instance, when Bill Maher made his Pope comments, FOX"News" pounced on him and stated that free speech had a limit:

IchfBHLAMng

When the Danish cartoons, which ARE a MUCH more vile, hateful attack than what Bill Maher said (a hundred fold over), they were up-in-arms about how Muslims must accept free speech or leave. In fact MOST of the media said the same thing.

-bm-a9lBafc

Look how the tables have turned. NOW, it's not free speech...it's hate rhetoric. Now, it's vile, juvenile and unbecoming to society to support such ludicrous acts?

Thats a very good observation and I think its a valid one at that.

Also, another observation that I feel many from the religious community are missing is that religion as a whole is being attacked and ridiculed.

This is a country that Constitutions supports the freedom of religion but yet there is an element that is constantly ridiculing those who believe in G-d/higher power/Creator of everything, etc.

The religious community is so divided and polarized, that is seems that we take delight in seeing each other attacked yet our common ground is our belief and faith in the Creator of creation and that is what I see as the motive of an unseen element: To destroy G-d...in the minds of humanity.

United we stand and divided we fall. An old but highly effective tactic.


One thing of note. While Islam, Christianity and even Buddhism, among others, is being attacked in the media and ridiculed on messages boards on the internet, it is surprisingly quiet in regard to Judaism.

[sshuttari]

awesome thread guys. I actually learned a lot because I get questions asked all the time that I can't answer about Islam. And I actually am Muslim myself.

I guess it just goes to show knoweledge is power...