Here in Canada a small group of Muslims called for sharia courts for their own people. They were shouted down - marches even held to protest them - by a much, MUCH larger group of Muslims who had had enough of that crap in the old world and wanted no part of it here.
In Canada maybe - but look at Muslim opinion around the world
In this context, it would mean as a justice of the peace deliberately not following the law because he personally feels it's wrong. Or some clerk, fresh on marriage #4 deciding same-sex marriage is wrong, deciding not to issue a license.
Or maybe an Imam refusing to solemnize a same sex marriage?
In this context, it would mean as a justice of the peace deliberately not following the law because he personally feels it's wrong. Or some clerk, fresh on marriage #4 deciding same-sex marriage is wrong, deciding not to issue a license.
It does not mean that - you are setting up a straw man here.
I wouldn't expect a vegan to apply for a job in an abbatoir but if a vegan sets up his own restaurant I wouldn't expect the state to force him to sell meat.
If I decided not to pay taxes because my money funds war, I'm guessing that wouldn't fly.
It wouldn't fly if you expected the state to just let you do it.
If you believe something strongly you need to be prepared to suffer for it and many Christians in the past have done so.
Islam, as an ideology, is incompatible with American values and ideals. People like that
Don't make the mistake of jumping from "an ideology" to "people".
Almost all muslims are born into the faith, and held there by vicious anti-apostasy laws (in Muslim countries) or social pressure (often with a veiled threat of violence) elsewhere.
Muslims are the greatest victims of the ideology and the best thing we can do is to provide routes of escape for them.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: basic humanity and decency
I don't think you are correct about French nationality law. See : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_nationality_law It seems pretty clear to me that there has never been a significant impediment to a person born in France to residents of France acquiring French Nationality. There seems to have been aminor impediment for a short while a few years ago but not enough to justify your conclusions.
Anyone born in Britian to a resident (as opposed to a tourist or other short term visitor) is British by default and there are still problems with non-assimilation here.
This is the same bullshit that comes up EVERY SINGLE TIME there's a new influx of immigrants from a particular country. Remember the Know Nothing party? They said the same thing about those darn Catholics who would bring their awful religion to the US.
Except that history shows that Islam is different from all those other groups.
Look at the middle east today.
All those so called islamic countries were originally conquered by the sword. Before that most of the region was Christian except Persia which was Zoroastrian. Interestingly Zorastrianism is making a comeback in (what should be) Kurdistan. Further east Afghanistan was largely Buddhist and India had a mixture of were Hindus, Buddhists and a few Christians.
All of the middle east and a large part of India was initially taken by violence and then, over centuries, reinforced by a system of apartheid which rewarded conversion to Islam and penalised anyone who tried to leave it.
Even in countries that were not initially taken by violence the story is not good.
Here is an Indonesian former muslim speaking:
"For thousands of years my country (Indonesia) was a Hindu Buddhist kingdom. The last Hindu king was kind enough to give a tax exempt property for the first Muslim missionary to live and to preach his religion. Slowly the followers of the new religion were growing, and after they became so strong the kingdom was attacked, those who refused to become Muslims had to flee for their life to the neighboring island of Bali or to a high mountain of Tengger, where they have been able to keep their religion until now. Slowly from the Hindu Buddhist Kingdom, Indonesia became the largest Islamic country in the world. If there is any lesson to be learnt by Americans at all, the history of my country is worth pondering upon. We are not hate mongering, bigoted people; rather, we are freedom loving, democracy loving and human loving people. We just don’t want this freedom and democracy to be taken away from us by our ignorance and misguided ‘political correctness’, and the pretension of tolerance.”
When those two come in conflict, God’s rules always win. In essence, if we are ever ordered by a government authority to personally violate and sin
Not very subtle are you.
The word "personally violate" are key here. This is not talking about people imposing their views on others it is about people having others' views imposed on them.
If you are a vegan then I would not expect you to try to stop other people eating meat but I would equally not expect you to submit if the state ordered you to eat meat.
There is a HUGE difference. I am surprised that you don't see it.
If you are referring to radical Islam, then I would somewhat agree, but then I would also say that "radical Christianity" and "radical Atheism" are also incompatible with any civilized society.
Careful.
Firstly as Erdogan said- there is no "radical Islam there is only Islam"
Secondly, if by radical you mean "strongly adhering to the tenets of the religion then Christianity says
Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's
and
So long as it lies with you live at peace with all
whereas ISlam says
And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah. (8:38)
When you are so US centric youdo of course miss the problem that exists on a global scale.
The US is only 1% Muslim - so on its face you would expect that only 1 in 100 terror attacks that take place would be by Muslims - but yet if you look at actual attacks where multiple "stranger" lives were lost (where there is a single victim known to the attacker then it may well be just one of those I really like you murders) you will find that it is far more than 1 in 100 over recent years.
Of course the US has stupidly lax laws about guns and explosives and a law enforcement arm that is more interested in creating plots than solving them (not to mention a recent president who had an agenda of defending islam and smearing Christianity een though he officially professed it).
BUT the real issue here isn't about what happens in the West. It is about what happens in places where Islam rules.
Now Trump's banwas stupid - and off target tactically - but at least he doesn't look at Islam through rose tinted spectacles to the same extent you seem to.
At the end of the cold war the security services couldn't bring themselves to give up Russia as an enemy. Consequently they continued to back political movements that were at root nationalist, anti-Russian.
Russia initially (during the Yeltsin years and the early Putin years) tried to get on side with the west - but it became clear to them after a while that they were getting nowhere. That is why we have seen a more aggressive stance in recent years.
Now Trump to his credit seems to want to reverse that but he has been far from smart in his approach.
The security service really do need to be cleaned from anti-Russian prejudice but this is not the way to go about it.
Security through obscurity does work - but not if you are a big target.
To be secure you just need enough security to make it not worth the while of the attacker.
Provided you are not an important target being different from everyone else helps because it means that the effort spent on breaking your security is specific to you.
"Even worse is the opinion that God allows people to lead a sinful life on earth in order to punish them eternally after death. This is a blasphemous and perverted understanding of God, a calumny of God: ‘If someone says that He has put up with them here on earth in order that His patience may be known with the idea that He would punish them mercilessly, such a person thinks in an unspeakably blasphemous way about God, due to his infantile way of thinking: he is removing from God His kindness,
goodness and compassion, all the things because of which He truly bears with sinners and wicked men. Such a person is attributing to God enslavement to passion, supposing that He has not consented to their being chastised here, seeing that He has prepared them for a much greater misfortune, in exchange for a short
lived patience. Not only does such a person fail to attribute something praiseworthy to God, but he also calumniates Him’"
Jesus says that he has come to destroy families by making family members hate each other. He has "come not to send peace, but a sword.
He was predicting the reaction of opponents not advocating actions for hs followers - cf what happened when Jesus was arrested.
Any city...to be burned. (John 15:6)
See my response above these are all issues along the same lines. They are not commandments for Christians to act in violent ways.
As for the "book burning" well - not all books are necessarily good - like any technology they can be used for good and evil.
As for your last quotes - well they are a general condemnation of immorality - not specifically directed at any particular group.
It is true that the bible specifies a rather restricted form of sexual morality (which just about everyone fails on) - but then again remember the story of Jesus with the woman caught in adultery - vs the incident with the money changers - rather shows where His priorities lay.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Don't why even have even customs checkpoints. Every person in the world has a right to come here and stay.
You challenged me to find such a commandment in the Koran, and I gave you two. The article has a link to more.
Really only one and a half - and the link to more didn't reveal anything new.
The same is true of the Bible.
No it isn't. Look here for a torough analysis:
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics_-_Scripture
Note this site is maintained by the ex muslims of North America- so they know their stuff - but they are not hate motivated - eg here is their policy statement:
The same is true of Christians. Keep studying that history.
Not the same at all. IN islam the interpretation of the texts changes. This does not happen in Christianity. It is true that the behaviour of Christians deteriorated when the Roman Empire adopted Christianity - but the bad behaviour came from the secular authorities and was frequently opposed by the church.
Also it took 300 years for this problem to arise in Christianity. It happened within 15 years in Islam.
Just like George W -who attacked Iraq on "terrorism" grounds when (bad though he was) Saddam had never been responsible for terrorism directly against the US - if anything he had restrained the jihadis in Iraq.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Don't why even have even customs checkpoints. Every person in the world has a right to come here and stay.
Particularly medieval Christianity does not have an overly impressive relation to science and mathematics (compared to Persia and Arabia, for example).
Medieval Western Christianity maybe.
However the (so called) Byzantine (actually Eastern Roman) Empire maintained the culture of ancient Greece/Rome for most of this period. What you call arabia mostly got its learning from there.
On the post: FBI Arresting More Americans For Targeting Muslims, Than Muslims For Targeting Americans
Re: Re: Re: Re:
That is what he said when he was weak and living in Mecca.
It isn't what he did later on.
If he had followed his original teaching you would never have heard of him.
On the post: FBI Arresting More Americans For Targeting Muslims, Than Muslims For Targeting Americans
Re: Re: Culture clash
Here in Canada a small group of Muslims called for sharia courts for their own people. They were shouted down - marches even held to protest them - by a much, MUCH larger group of Muslims who had had enough of that crap in the old world and wanted no part of it here.
In Canada maybe - but look at Muslim opinion around the world
http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview/
On the post: FBI Arresting More Americans For Targeting Muslims, Than Muslims For Targeting Americans
Re: Re: Re: Re: Culture clash
In this context, it would mean as a justice of the peace deliberately not following the law because he personally feels it's wrong. Or some clerk, fresh on marriage #4 deciding same-sex marriage is wrong, deciding not to issue a license.
Or maybe an Imam refusing to solemnize a same sex marriage?
On the post: FBI Arresting More Americans For Targeting Muslims, Than Muslims For Targeting Americans
Re: Re: Re: Re: Culture clash
In this context, it would mean as a justice of the peace deliberately not following the law because he personally feels it's wrong. Or some clerk, fresh on marriage #4 deciding same-sex marriage is wrong, deciding not to issue a license.
It does not mean that - you are setting up a straw man here.
I wouldn't expect a vegan to apply for a job in an abbatoir but if a vegan sets up his own restaurant I wouldn't expect the state to force him to sell meat.
If I decided not to pay taxes because my money funds war, I'm guessing that wouldn't fly.
It wouldn't fly if you expected the state to just let you do it.
If you believe something strongly you need to be prepared to suffer for it and many Christians in the past have done so.
http://blog.livesofthefirstworldwar.org/conscientious-objectors-in-the-first-world-war/
On the post: FBI Arresting More Americans For Targeting Muslims, Than Muslims For Targeting Americans
Re: Re: Re: Re: Culture clash
On the post: FBI Arresting More Americans For Targeting Muslims, Than Muslims For Targeting Americans
Re: Re: Re: Re: Culture clash
It is YOU who is saying that this time it is different.
ie that the impact of Islam on the US will be different from what it has been elsewhere
On the post: FBI Arresting More Americans For Targeting Muslims, Than Muslims For Targeting Americans
Re:
Islam, as an ideology, is incompatible with American values and ideals. People like that
Don't make the mistake of jumping from "an ideology" to "people".
Almost all muslims are born into the faith, and held there by vicious anti-apostasy laws (in Muslim countries) or social pressure (often with a veiled threat of violence) elsewhere.
Muslims are the greatest victims of the ideology and the best thing we can do is to provide routes of escape for them.
See http://www.exmna.org/
On the post: FBI Arresting More Americans For Targeting Muslims, Than Muslims For Targeting Americans
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: basic humanity and decency
See :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_nationality_law
It seems pretty clear to me that there has never been a significant impediment to a person born in France to residents of France acquiring French Nationality. There seems to have been aminor impediment for a short while a few years ago but not enough to justify your conclusions.
Anyone born in Britian to a resident (as opposed to a tourist or other short term visitor) is British by default and there are still problems with non-assimilation here.
On the post: FBI Arresting More Americans For Targeting Muslims, Than Muslims For Targeting Americans
Re: Re: Re: Re:
There's no shortage of similar "our god over all else" quotes in the Bible.
Well - .if there is a god then that is exactly what you would expect so duhhh.
However the key point is whether there are specific instructions valid for all time to enforce this by violence in this world.
It also matters whether these are the most recent texts or whether they are old historical events.
We still have the occasional problem with radical Christians
Show me an example where the "problem" come from someone who prioritises the messages in the sermon on the mount.
I don't understand how anyone whose behaviour blatantly contradicts those messages could be called a Christian at all - let alone a radical one.
On the post: FBI Arresting More Americans For Targeting Muslims, Than Muslims For Targeting Americans
Re: Re: Culture clash
This is the same bullshit that comes up EVERY SINGLE TIME there's a new influx of immigrants from a particular country. Remember the Know Nothing party? They said the same thing about those darn Catholics who would bring their awful religion to the US.
Except that history shows that Islam is different from all those other groups.
Look at the middle east today.
All those so called islamic countries were originally conquered by the sword. Before that most of the region was Christian except Persia which was Zoroastrian. Interestingly Zorastrianism is making a comeback in (what should be) Kurdistan. Further east Afghanistan was largely Buddhist and India had a mixture of were Hindus, Buddhists and a few Christians.
All of the middle east and a large part of India was initially taken by violence and then, over centuries, reinforced by a system of apartheid which rewarded conversion to Islam and penalised anyone who tried to leave it.
Even in countries that were not initially taken by violence the story is not good.
Here is an Indonesian former muslim speaking:
"For thousands of years my country (Indonesia) was a Hindu Buddhist kingdom. The last Hindu king was kind enough to give a tax exempt property for the first Muslim missionary to live and to preach his religion. Slowly the followers of the new religion were growing, and after they became so strong the kingdom was attacked, those who refused to become Muslims had to flee for their life to the neighboring island of Bali or to a high mountain of Tengger, where they have been able to keep their religion until now. Slowly from the Hindu Buddhist Kingdom, Indonesia became the largest Islamic country in the world. If there is any lesson to be learnt by Americans at all, the history of my country is worth pondering upon. We are not hate mongering, bigoted people; rather, we are freedom loving, democracy loving and human loving people. We just don’t want this freedom and democracy to be taken away from us by our ignorance and misguided ‘political correctness’, and the pretension of tolerance.”
On the post: FBI Arresting More Americans For Targeting Muslims, Than Muslims For Targeting Americans
Re: Re: Culture clash
When those two come in conflict, God’s rules always win. In essence, if we are ever ordered by a government authority to personally violate and sin
Not very subtle are you.
The word "personally violate" are key here. This is not talking about people imposing their views on others it is about people having others' views imposed on them.
If you are a vegan then I would not expect you to try to stop other people eating meat but I would equally not expect you to submit if the state ordered you to eat meat.
There is a HUGE difference. I am surprised that you don't see it.
On the post: FBI Arresting More Americans For Targeting Muslims, Than Muslims For Targeting Americans
Re: Re:
If you are referring to radical Islam, then I would somewhat agree, but then I would also say that "radical Christianity" and "radical Atheism" are also incompatible with any civilized society.
Careful.
Firstly as Erdogan said- there is no "radical Islam there is only Islam"
Secondly, if by radical you mean "strongly adhering to the tenets of the religion then Christianity says
Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's
and
So long as it lies with you live at peace with all
whereas ISlam says
And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah. (8:38)
and few other things to be found here
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/loyalty-to-non-muslim-government.aspx
Whereas a radical atheist well one who believed in dialectical materialism maybe...
On the post: FBI Arresting More Americans For Targeting Muslims, Than Muslims For Targeting Americans
Missing the problem
The US is only 1% Muslim - so on its face you would expect that only 1 in 100 terror attacks that take place would be by Muslims - but yet if you look at actual attacks where multiple "stranger" lives were lost (where there is a single victim known to the attacker then it may well be just one of those I really like you murders) you will find that it is far more than 1 in 100 over recent years.
Of course the US has stupidly lax laws about guns and explosives and a law enforcement arm that is more interested in creating plots than solving them (not to mention a recent president who had an agenda of defending islam and smearing Christianity een though he officially professed it).
BUT the real issue here isn't about what happens in the West. It is about what happens in places where Islam rules.
See https://medium.com/@najwa.najib/donald-trump-is-good-for-middle-eastern-christians-350f049bed62#.djw 5dayw8
Now Trump's banwas stupid - and off target tactically - but at least he doesn't look at Islam through rose tinted spectacles to the same extent you seem to.
On the post: Get Ready For 'Leak Investigations' In The Trump White House
Re: Re: What if?
At the end of the cold war the security services couldn't bring themselves to give up Russia as an enemy. Consequently they continued to back political movements that were at root nationalist, anti-Russian.
Russia initially (during the Yeltsin years and the early Putin years) tried to get on side with the west - but it became clear to them after a while that they were getting nowhere. That is why we have seen a more aggressive stance in recent years.
Now Trump to his credit seems to want to reverse that but he has been far from smart in his approach.
The security service really do need to be cleaned from anti-Russian prejudice but this is not the way to go about it.
On the post: Get Ready For 'Leak Investigations' In The Trump White House
Gander
On the post: US Secret Service Prefers Belt Sanders And Third-Party Vendors To Cell Phone Encryption Backdoors
Re:
Security through obscurity does work - but not if you are a big target.
To be secure you just need enough security to make it not worth the while of the attacker.
Provided you are not an important target being different from everyone else helps because it means that the effort spent on breaking your security is specific to you.
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Christ ... expressly overruled any interpretation that suggests violence
Jesus says that most people will go to hell. (Matthew 7:13-14)
Far be it from me to interpret the New Testament for you - I'll leave that to St Isaac the Syrian.
http://www.wacom2017.org/sites/wacom2017.org/IMG/pdf/Bishop_Hilarion_Alfeyev.pdf
"Even worse is the opinion that God allows people to lead a sinful life on earth in order to punish them eternally after death. This is a blasphemous and perverted understanding of God, a calumny of God: ‘If someone says that He has put up with them here on earth in order that His patience may be known with the idea that He would punish them mercilessly, such a person thinks in an unspeakably blasphemous way about God, due to his infantile way of thinking: he is removing from God His kindness, goodness and compassion, all the things because of which He truly bears with sinners and wicked men. Such a person is attributing to God enslavement to passion, supposing that He has not consented to their being chastised here, seeing that He has prepared them for a much greater misfortune, in exchange for a short lived patience. Not only does such a person fail to attribute something praiseworthy to God, but he also calumniates Him’"
Jesus says that he has come to destroy families by making family members hate each other. He has "come not to send peace, but a sword.
He was predicting the reaction of opponents not advocating actions for hs followers - cf what happened when Jesus was arrested.
Any city...to be burned. (John 15:6)
See my response above these are all issues along the same lines. They are not commandments for Christians to act in violent ways.
As for the "book burning" well - not all books are necessarily good - like any technology they can be used for good and evil.
As for your last quotes - well they are a general condemnation of immorality - not specifically directed at any particular group.
It is true that the bible specifies a rather restricted form of sexual morality (which just about everyone fails on) - but then again remember the story of Jesus with the woman caught in adultery - vs the incident with the money changers - rather shows where His priorities lay.
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Don't why even have even customs checkpoints. Every person in the world has a right to come here and stay.
You challenged me to find such a commandment in the Koran, and I gave you two. The article has a link to more.
Really only one and a half - and the link to more didn't reveal anything new.
The same is true of the Bible.
No it isn't. Look here for a torough analysis: https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics_-_Scripture Note this site is maintained by the ex muslims of North America- so they know their stuff - but they are not hate motivated - eg here is their policy statement:
http://www.exmna.org/policy-paper-no-bigotry-no-apology/
The same is true of Christians. Keep studying that history.
Not the same at all. IN islam the interpretation of the texts changes. This does not happen in Christianity. It is true that the behaviour of Christians deteriorated when the Roman Empire adopted Christianity - but the bad behaviour came from the secular authorities and was frequently opposed by the church.
Also it took 300 years for this problem to arise in Christianity. It happened within 15 years in Islam.
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: In the interest of national security
On the post: Court Unanimously Keeps Lower Court's Injunction Against Trump's Immigration Order In Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Don't why even have even customs checkpoints. Every person in the world has a right to come here and stay.
Particularly medieval Christianity does not have an overly impressive relation to science and mathematics (compared to Persia and Arabia, for example).
Medieval Western Christianity maybe.
However the (so called) Byzantine (actually Eastern Roman) Empire maintained the culture of ancient Greece/Rome for most of this period. What you call arabia mostly got its learning from there.
Next >>