Is Islam a Religion

[chris7375]

You are an American citizen participating in American society with a US Constitution that proclaims itself supreme (Article 6. Section 2), and in upholding that (Supremacy Clause) you are someone able to say that Islam (or any other supremacist movement) is unconstitutional. THAT'S who you are.

You are also an American citizen who is bound by the laws of the USA (which numerous Islamic laws are in violation of), and you are one who has the right to expect others (Muslims and anyone else) to abide by those laws. If they don't, you have the right to call the police, and have them arrested. THAT'S who you are.

Yes if a Muslim comes to our country you are correct our laws are supreme. I will not deny you that their laws need to be put on the back burner because they want to be citizens of this country. So they need to abide by those laws.

As for the very common "Out of Context" talking point you mentioned, I can only say that it does not matter if you read a sura by itself, or if you read the previous or next sura that comes after. In the Koran, suras are placed intermittently. Each one appears totally unrelated to the one before and after it. There generally IS NO CONTEXT, but nice try.

Example: Sura 4:34 endorses wife-beating. You can look at many translations. They are the same. There is no other translation. 4:33 and 4:35 are different subjects. 4:33 pertains to inheritance and 4:35 is about marriage arbitration. And ther eis nothing in 4:34 that nullifies a husband's "right" to beat his wife (the last 2 words of the sura).

Note: if you're going to try whitewashing Islam on me, be it known, I've been reading the Koran for 53 years, in 18 different translations of it.

Oh no you assume to much I would say. O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil). (9:123) You assume they are to make war but how do you know this is what is being told to those of the Muslim faith. Their is other ways to fight other then physical.

Romans 1-3

1 Wherefore thou art without excuse, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judges another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest dost practise the same things. 2 And we know that the judgment of God is according to truth against them that practise such things. 3 And reckonest thou this, O man, who judgest them that practise such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?

Who are we to judge them we are no one and have no right to say what they are doing is wrong. This is not for us to judge the text or the person who wrote it or the people who worship it. That is for God alone. This is where you fail I am sorry this is how I see it.

I don't care if you been reading it 70 years in 30 different languages it makes you no expert on the subject. I never professed to be an expert on the subject and I also said 9 times out of ten people misquote the koran. I am well aware some of the text around certain scripture is unrelated hence why I said that statement.

Who are you to tell them they are wrong in their faith. I believe ours is right by faith as do they. Yet none of us know do we last time I looked it is faith driven or do you have an inside track I don't?

 

[tecoyah]

You should easily be able to see your instances of verbal abuse, and I suspect if you look over your last few posts you'll find them. As for the caution, why don't YOU proceed that way ?

I have reviewed as you suggest, and see nothing disrespectful in my replies. I take it from the decision not to show me where these comments exist, that they simply do not and you instead have an issue with me.

Your impotent and poorly veiled final line is rather silly, as my membership is not at risk...as of right now, YOURS IS.

 

[RoccoR]

Protectionist; et al,

I can only offer my opinion, and cite the the general teachings at the next level.

"Generally accepted" ? Is that so ? You haven't shown a shred of EVIDENCE to back that up. It could be that most (more than half) people in the world regard Islam as NOT a religion. Thus far, I haven't shown any more or less EVIDENCE to support that either.

(COMMENT)

Well, if you call the citations from the Routledge and Standford Encyclopedia's of Philosophy "no evidence," then you are right.

General Acceptance presupposes that someone has the necessary KSA's (knowledge, skills and abilities) to study and digest new information that is relevant to the subject matter, and understand the limitations.

I refute your assessment of the WNWCD. You can call it what you want (you've offered nothing to back that either). I say the WNWCD certainly IS an authoritative source of definition, and that will really be the day when we, in America, go by Muslim "ethics" (which are essentially NON-ethics) to govern our behavior.

(COMMENT)

Alternative:

Is·lam (s-läm, z-, släm, z-) n.

1. A monotheistic religion characterized by the acceptance of the doctrine of submission to God and to Muhammad as the chief and last prophet of God.
2.

a. The people or nations that practice Islam; the Muslim world.
b. The civilization developed by the Muslim world.​

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.​

Islam [ˈɪzlɑːm] n

1. (Non-Christian Religions / Islam) Also called Islamism [ɪzˈlɑːmɪzəm ˈɪzləmɪzəm] the religion of Muslims, having the Koran as its sacred scripture and teaching that there is only one God and that Mohammed is his prophet; Mohammedanism
2. (Non-Christian Religions / Islam)

a. Muslims collectively and their civilization
b. the countries where the Muslim religion is predominant​

Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003​

You may not like the ethics of Islam, that is inconsequential, they have ethics (evil or benign), just as Christianity had ethics during the Spanish Inquisition, or when it forced the conversion of Central and South America inhabitants; or, when it ignited the crusades.

This is all a bunch of poppycock. Islam has NO ETHICS. It is nothing but a criminal (under US law) ideology started by criminals in Asia Minor 14 centuries ago, and perpetuated by mass genocide, which has killed 270 million people around the globe, and forced many millions more into its ranks. It is probably the least ethical thing that has ever existed.

(COMMENT)

Yes, ethical by who's standards?

Under US Law, Islam is protected as a "religion." It is not a federal concern.

Religions evolve. Whether driven by the MAO-A Gene (Warrior Gene) or the VMAT-2 Gene (God Gene) (or the combination of both), OR some other mechanism we have yet to discover, some segments of society adopt and change the religious beliefs they have over time.

In the 13th century, Saint Thomas Aquinas, while highly critical of the Prophet Mohammed, considered Islam a Sect founded on erroneous doctrine. In Aquinas' eyes, Mohammed forbid his followers access to the Old and New Testaments because Mohammed plagiarized the testimonials; Islam having none of its own. St Aquinas never entertained the idea that Islam was not a Religious Sect (a Religion), just a misguided Religion.

For people like all of you to come in here and say that things like wife-beating, genocide, rape, pedophilia, slavery, etc. should be accepted because one group accepts them is insanity. (OR you all are representitives of that group yourselves -wouldn't be the first time I was talking to Islamists in a computer forum).

(COMMENT)

I'm Christian! Ito-Americano, educated in a Catholic School and a former Alter Boy. I have never addressed "wife-beating, genocide, rape, pedophilia, slavery, etc," in this discussion.

• About Me: http://www.politicalfray.com/member.php?u=958

Since I haven't discussed these attributes, it is important to remember that "ethics" can be good or evil.

Ethics are an instrument and guide to action; and making determinations based on accepted societal norms. What is normal in a Muslim community is not necessarily in a Christian Community. The morals are different and they may seem barbaric. But that aside, it doen't mean that anti-Christian or other non-Christian religious sects are not religions. this gives rise to the concept of "Evil Ethics." What is evil is determined by what your society has chosen to be unacceptable behavior.

There are many ethical systems that are evil. They are destructive of one's life, and the degree to which they are practiced is the degree to which life is made difficult or impossible. Since these evil systems lead to death, they are usually compromised when the impact on one's life is too great. The compromise is often justified as holding two standards at the same time, without understanding why that is impossible.
SOURCE:http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Evil_Main.html

It might also be noted that ALMOST ALL Muslims living today are descendants of NON-MUSLIM ANCESTORS who were killed or forced to become Muslims, centuries ago. Hell of a way for someone to think of himself as belonging to a group. Sheeeeeshh !!

(COMMENT)

And what does this establish?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

myp, Protectionist, et al,

While I agree with this, in part, I believe the underlining cause is a lack of philosophical understanding in the nature of religion, and the causal effects it has on society.

Protectionist. I'll tell you what, if you think you have such a strong case, why don't you try to get a case started that Islam is not a religion and does not deserve 1st amendment protection? If you think you have such a strong case, then surely it will be a compelling case. If you think you are so right on the Constitutional argument, then why don't you present it in front of the ultimate judges and those who actually have the power to do whatever it is you want to be done- the judicial system.

(COMMENT)

The Judicial System is an extension of common law accepted by society. The christian world has one (a set actually - which accounts for differences in the western world) and the non-Christian world has another (Islam has Shira Law and the Chinese have one largely based on Confucianism).

There is no universal law, but there are some commonalities.

A legal press doesn't actual solve the lack of knowledge on the subject or the expression of discontent associated with the behaviors of Islamic believers. For instance, I can start a religious sect based on Wicca, Witchcraft and Paganism (Magic), or be like some American Indian Tribes and use mind altering drugs to achieve one with the Universe or Afterworld - connecting to long dead ancestors. Or, I could be like the Neolithic European that indulged in ritual killings to appease the deities of the time.

As barbaric, distasteful, atrocious, cruel, brutal, fiendish, heartless, sadistic, or savage, today's Islam may appear to be, it is based on the fanatical following and fundamentalist beliefs associated with those mental incentives and imperatives that are driven by their particular societal norms. Oddly enough, not so different from the hysterical actions performed in the name of God during the Salem Witch trial. Islamist find their behavior perfectly acceptable by their standards. And they have no single set of teachers or leaders that can convince them otherwise.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Protectionist]

myp, Protectionist, et al,

While I agree with this, in part, I believe the underlining cause is a lack of philosophical understanding in the nature of religion, and the causal effects it has on society.


(COMMENT)

The Judicial System is an extension of common law accepted by society. The christian world has one (a set actually - which accounts for differences in the western world) and the non-Christian world has another (Islam has Shira Law and the Chinese have one largely based on Confucianism).

There is no universal law, but there are some commonalities.

A legal press doesn't actual solve the lack of knowledge on the subject or the expression of discontent associated with the behaviors of Islamic believers. For instance, I can start a religious sect based on Wicca, Witchcraft and Paganism (Magic), or be like some American Indian Tribes and use mind altering drugs to achieve one with the Universe or Afterworld - connecting to long dead ancestors. Or, I could be like the Neolithic European that indulged in ritual killings to appease the deities of the time.

As barbaric, distasteful, atrocious, cruel, brutal, fiendish, heartless, sadistic, or savage, today's Islam may appear to be, it is based on the fanatical following and fundamentalist beliefs associated with those mental incentives and imperatives that are driven by their particular societal norms. Oddly enough, not so different from the hysterical actions performed in the name of God during the Salem Witch trial. Islamist find their behavior perfectly acceptable by their standards. And they have no single set of teachers or leaders that can convince them otherwise.

Most Respectfully,
R

Dang, you're even more rough on them than I am. :giggle:

 

[Protectionist]

Protectionist; et al,

I can only offer my opinion, and cite the the general teachings at the next level.


(COMMENT)

Well, if you call the citations from the Routledge and Standford Encyclopedia's of Philosophy "no evidence," then you are right.

General Acceptance presupposes that someone has the necessary KSA's (knowledge, skills and abilities) to study and digest new information that is relevant to the subject matter, and understand the limitations.


(COMMENT)

Alternative:

Is·lam (s-läm, z-, släm, z-) n.

1. A monotheistic religion characterized by the acceptance of the doctrine of submission to God and to Muhammad as the chief and last prophet of God.
2.

a. The people or nations that practice Islam; the Muslim world.
b. The civilization developed by the Muslim world.​

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.​

Islam [ˈɪzlɑːm] n

1. (Non-Christian Religions / Islam) Also called Islamism [ɪzˈlɑːmɪzəm ˈɪzləmɪzəm] the religion of Muslims, having the Koran as its sacred scripture and teaching that there is only one God and that Mohammed is his prophet; Mohammedanism
2. (Non-Christian Religions / Islam)

a. Muslims collectively and their civilization
b. the countries where the Muslim religion is predominant​

Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003​

You may not like the ethics of Islam, that is inconsequential, they have ethics (evil or benign), just as Christianity had ethics during the Spanish Inquisition, or when it forced the conversion of Central and South America inhabitants; or, when it ignited the crusades.


(COMMENT)

Yes, ethical by who's standards?

Under US Law, Islam is protected as a "religion." It is not a federal concern.

Religions evolve. Whether driven by the MAO-A Gene (Warrior Gene) or the VMAT-2 Gene (God Gene) (or the combination of both), OR some other mechanism we have yet to discover, some segments of society adopt and change the religious beliefs they have over time.

In the 13th century, Saint Thomas Aquinas, while highly critical of the Prophet Mohammed, considered Islam a Sect founded on erroneous doctrine. In Aquinas' eyes, Mohammed forbid his followers access to the Old and New Testaments because Mohammed plagiarized the testimonials; Islam having none of its own. St Aquinas never entertained the idea that Islam was not a Religious Sect (a Religion), just a misguided Religion.


(COMMENT)

I'm Christian! Ito-Americano, educated in a Catholic School and a former Alter Boy. I have never addressed "wife-beating, genocide, rape, pedophilia, slavery, etc," in this discussion.

• About Me: http://www.politicalfray.com/member.php?u=958

Since I haven't discussed these attributes, it is important to remember that "ethics" can be good or evil.

Ethics are an instrument and guide to action; and making determinations based on accepted societal norms. What is normal in a Muslim community is not necessarily in a Christian Community. The morals are different and they may seem barbaric. But that aside, it doen't mean that anti-Christian or other non-Christian religious sects are not religions. this gives rise to the concept of "Evil Ethics." What is evil is determined by what your society has chosen to be unacceptable behavior.




(COMMENT)

And what does this establish?

Most Respectfully,
R

I have to confess that I've been on this computer for hours while it seems like everyone in the forum is talking to me at once. I could respond tot you more but I'm out of time. Will answer briefely now.

Houghton Mifflin is a notorious Islam whitewasher publisher well-known for their slanted textbooks (ex. Across the Centuries), exposed in the 2008 report by the American Textbook Council. One of their editors, Abigail Jungreis compliments the seditionist Council on Islamic Education. In 2005, Houghton Mifflin had removed the word "jihad" from another of its high profile textbooks Patterns of Interaction, and from its entire series of social studies textbooks. And the courtsuit filed by parents of students at the Byron Union School District, in Byron CA, came as a result of controversial exercises students were required to complete where they engaged in role-playing as Muslims, even dressing in Middle Eastern clothes and memorize parts of the Koran. These came partially fronm the Houghton-Mifflin textbook Across the Centuries, seen by mnay as an attempt a t proselytzing for Islam.

I don't have an y mor etime (I've already given up most of the day) but inshort my dictionary confines "ethics" to MORAL standards >> ONLY.

http://www.blessedcause.org/protest/Exposing the Council on Islamic Education.htm

 

[David]

Dang, you're even more rough on them than I am. :giggle:

Muslims think he's a heretic, he wouldn't be a fan.

 

[bluefig]

Yes, I think Islam is a religion but it has political elements that set it somewhat apart from most of the other religions. i agree with those who have said that it is brutal and violent as all gays, women and Christians in Islamic countries know very well, first hand. I find it hard to separate it's political/legal/religious aspects.

 

[tecoyah]

I agree Islam is a unique religion, I also find the basic tenants of the faith unacceptable due to the backward facing nature concerning women, societal advancement, and violence.
I will also state my dislike of ALL religions based on many of the same issues. While Islam certainly puts forth the most extreme example of ignorant human nature...it is far from alone.

 

[chris7375]

I agree Islam is a unique religion, I also find the basic tenants of the faith unacceptable due to the backward facing nature concerning women, societal advancement, and violence.
I will also state my dislike of ALL religions based on many of the same issues. While Islam certainly puts forth the most extreme example of ignorant human nature...it is far from alone.

Though we may not agree with all aspects of their faith. It is their right to believe and practice however they want without interference from us.

 

[tecoyah]

Though we may not agree with all aspects of their faith. It is their right to believe and practice however they want without interference from us.

Until said religious practice is the basis for 3000 dead folks in our country.

 

[David]

Until said religious practice is the basis for 3000 dead folks in our country.

I'm sure they say the same about the 500k dead in Iraq.

 

[chris7375]

Until said religious practice is the basis for 3000 dead folks in our country.

Yeah and those three thousand could have been prevented by our government which they failed to do.

Also those three thousand were killed by a small sect of extremist which lets be honest does not compare to how many we have killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It is not for us to assimilate the world and bring them in line.

 

[clax]

Yeah and those three thousand could have been prevented by our government which they failed to do.

Also those three thousand were killed by a small sect of extremist which lets be honest does not compare to how many we have killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It is not for us to assimilate the world and bring them in line.

Not really a small sect, quite a large sect in fact.

But the killing of s couple thousand pales in comparison to the night levels of this killed in the middle east by middle easterners

 

[chris7375]

Not really a small sect, quite a large sect in fact.

But the killing of s couple thousand pales in comparison to the night levels of this killed in the middle east by middle easterners

Yet who created that sect whether it is large or small. Our Government created them.

What did they ask us to do and they would leave well enough alone. They ask that we withdraw all our troops in Arab countries especially Saudi Arabia. So what do we do put more troops in.

They look at our presence as an occupation and being quite honesty I can't blame them because that is basically what it is.

So we created the problem now it is biting us in the butt.

 

[clax]

Yet who created that sect whether it is large or small. Our Government created them.

What did they ask us to do and they would leave well enough alone. They ask that we withdraw all our troops in Arab countries especially Saudi Arabia. So what do we do put more troops in.

They look at our presence as an occupation and being quite honesty I can't blame them because that is basically what it is.

So we created the problem now it is biting us in the butt.

The problem is really far more complex than that. They were exterminating each other long before America became involved. That is really why we became involved.

 

[chris7375]

The problem is really far more complex than that. They were exterminating each other long before America became involved. That is really why we became involved.

Not our fight. Not our country. Not our people. They should be allowed to solve their own conflicts.

We helped create OBL we funded the mujahideen to fight the Soviet Union in 1979. That is when our involvement started. We had some Involvement prior to this but not to the extent that we started in 1979 till today.

Them exterminating themselves is far from why we became involved. Oil among other things made us involved.

 

[clax]

Not our fight. Not our country. Not our people. They should be allowed to solve their own conflicts.

We helped create OBL we funded the mujahideen to fight the Soviet Union in 1979. That is when our involvement started. We had some Involvement prior to this but not to the extent that we started in 1979 till today.

Them exterminating themselves is far from why we became involved. Oil among other things made us involved.

sure it is our fight, oil is a huge deal.

 

[chris7375]

sure it is our fight, oil is a huge deal.

Not our country or Countries so no it is not our fight. Instead of investing more in alternative fuel methods creating jobs in our country. Our government would rather make sure big business gets what they want.

Even the government officials are puppets.

 

[tecoyah]

I'm sure they say the same about the 500k dead in Iraq.

I'm sure they do as well...thing is, I was replying to this:

Originally Posted by chris7375
Though we may not agree with all aspects of their faith. It is their right to believe and practice however they want without interference from us.