Las Vegas shooting: Gunman 'identified as 64-year-old white male'

Original Quill wrote:

Miffs2 wrote:

I think there is a bit more than mental people to worry about in Islam. Or are you saying that the net work of Isis and all their devotees and Bin Laden and now Bin Ladens son and all the hate preachers are just a bunch of mental people? They are terrorists who kill and maim in the name of Allah, they certainly feel they are doing his will.

The Sunday morning preachers on television are not the mainstream of christianity, either.  People use religion as a vehicle for political and sociological aims.  Their's as much as ours.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

islam is the mental illness

All religion is mental illness.  But that's another matter.

Miffs2 wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Nope because if they were really following the Quran they wouldn’t be slaughtering Muslims.

They can’t pick and choose. That’s why I’m saying it’s all about control and claiming it’s for religion purposes.

Mental people need excuses to act out their mentality and justify it

I think there is a bit more than mental people to worry about in Islam. Or are you saying that the net work of Isis and all their devotees and Bin Laden and now Bin Ladens son and all the hate preachers are just a bunch of mental people? They are terrorists who kill and maim in the name of Allah, they certainly feel they are doing his will.

smelly-bandit wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

gelico wrote:
so, there must be two korans then.  the real one and the one you read sexy mama, cos that's a load of bollox but then again, that would hardly be the first time you've talked bollox now would it? you're adept lying so i'm sure you'll understand if i shrug and roll my eyes

and by the same token there must be more than one bible (actually thats true, but you get my point) a "real" one which inspires creatures like the KKK, westbro church etc and the one "normal people" read.

that's patently incorrect.

the KKK are not inspired by religious text but by the idea of racial segregation and white supremacy,the religion of the members is a moot point expect of course for Judaism, the KKK idiots seem to associate all Jews with the Jewish ethnicity rather than the religious beliefs.

likewise the westboro church cannot point to any biblical passage to justify their views

the qur'an by contrast, was written by a mass murdering psychopath that openly justifies murder terrorism and all the delights we see from the religion of peace.

in Syria and Iraq ISIS were crucifying and mutilating the bodies of "spies" before killing them.

why where they doing that?? because that is what the qur'an tells them to do with "those who make mischief in the land"

Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

that shit went down under ISIS, so how can they not be real Muslims following real Islam??

SM doesn't drink alcohol because the same book that tells ISIS to do the shit they do, tells her that alcohol is forbidden

i guess that means SM isn't a real Muslim then huh??  

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

how many of those blacks were Christians???

Probably none.  Christianity was an acquired religion from their masters.

gelico wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

islam is the mental illness

All religion is mental illness.  But that's another matter.

there's only ONE 'religion' - as far as i am aware - that calls for anyone who wants to leave it to be killed

please correct me if i'm wrong on that

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Miffs2 wrote:

I think there is a bit more than mental people to worry about in Islam. Or are you saying that the net work of Isis and all their devotees and Bin Laden and now Bin Ladens son and all the hate preachers are just a bunch of mental people? They are terrorists who kill and maim in the name of Allah, they certainly feel they are doing his will.

They are an organised group yes but they aren’t considered Muslims

As I keep saying if they represented Islam they would be buried as Muslims, which is not the case.

gelico wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

All religion is mental illness.  But that's another matter.

there's only ONE 'religion' - as far as i am aware - that calls for anyone who wants to leave it to be killed

please correct me if i'm wrong on that

smelly-bandit wrote:

gelico wrote:


there's only ONE 'religion' - as far as i am aware - that calls for anyone who wants to leave it to be killed

please correct me if i'm wrong on that

you are wrong

however, the other religions have undergone social and cultural reformations to "update" them to be more appropriate with an evolving human consciousness

you would be correct to say that there is only one religion that STILL calls for anyone who wants to leave it to be killed

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

how many of those blacks were Christians???

Probably none.  Christianity was an acquired religion from their masters.

even under slavery blacks embraced Christianity either through being born into the religion or as a result of conversion, willing or otherwise, the fact remains that many blacks to this day in America and throughout Africa are very devoutly christian  

the KKK in the picture could not be killing those black men out of some religious fanaticism, religion doesn't recognize race, yet the KKK were exclusively against blacks christian or otherwise, a white atheist would be not be treated as badly as black christian by the KKK

you are trying to establish a link with the KKK's actions and their religion with the same argument that you use to deny the link between the actions of ISIS and their religion

ie you claim the KKK are christian terrorists whilst ignoring the fact that they kill other Christians but claim that ISIS cannot be Muslim terrorist BECAUSE they kill other Muslims

methinks the point has gone right over your head smelly....

IF one is true then so is the other

I.e if all Muslims are "bad" because of the actions of islam then ALL christians are bad because of the ideology of te KKK and others

however if the majority of christians are NOT bad because of the actions of a "few" then the majority of Muslims are NOT bad because of the actions of a few.

YOU merel;y want to cut your cake both ways at once to justify your bias and lack of ability to think clearly.

gelico wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

All religion is mental illness.  But that's another matter.

there's only ONE 'religion' - as far as i am aware - that calls for anyone who wants to leave it to be killed

please correct me if i'm wrong on that

Lord Foul wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

how many of those blacks were Christians???

Probably none.  Christianity was an acquired religion from their masters.

even under slavery blacks embraced Christianity either through being born into the religion or as a result of conversion, willing or otherwise, the fact remains that many blacks to this day in America and throughout Africa are very devoutly christian  

the KKK in the picture could not be killing those black men out of some religious fanaticism, religion doesn't recognize race, yet the KKK were exclusively against blacks christian or otherwise, a white atheist would be not be treated as badly as black christian by the KKK

you are trying to establish a link with the KKK's actions and their religion with the same argument that you use to deny the link between the actions of ISIS and their religion

ie you claim the KKK are christian terrorists whilst ignoring the fact that they kill other Christians but claim that ISIS cannot be Muslim terrorist BECAUSE they kill other Muslims

methinks the point has gone right over your head smelly....

IF one is true then so is the other

I.e if all Muslims are "bad" because of the actions of islam then ALL christians are bad because of the ideology of te KKK and others

however if the majority of christians are NOT bad because of the actions of a "few" then the majority of Muslims are NOT bad because of the actions of a few.

YOU merel;y want to cut your cake both ways at once to justify your bias and lack of ability to think clearly.

Miffs2 wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

They are an organised group yes but they aren’t considered Muslims

As I keep saying if they represented Islam they would be buried as Muslims, which is not the case.

They consider themselves to be true Muslims. If a couple of refusals to bury is the extent of the resistance to the terrorists in your religion then you have problems.

Lord Foul wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

that's patently incorrect.

the KKK are not inspired by religious text but by the idea of racial segregation and white supremacy,the religion of the members is a moot point expect of course for Judaism, the KKK idiots seem to associate all Jews with the Jewish ethnicity rather than the religious beliefs.

likewise the westboro church cannot point to any biblical passage to justify their views

the qur'an by contrast, was written by a mass murdering psychopath that openly justifies murder terrorism and all the delights we see from the religion of peace.

in Syria and Iraq ISIS were crucifying and mutilating the bodies of "spies" before killing them.

why where they doing that?? because that is what the qur'an tells them to do with "those who make mischief in the land"

Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

that shit went down under ISIS, so how can they not be real Muslims following real Islam??

SM doesn't drink alcohol because the same book that tells ISIS to do the shit they do, tells her that alcohol is forbidden

i guess that means SM isn't a real Muslim then huh??  

as to what Isis do, that is the nature of fundamentalism, they seek justification by the reverse of what I mentioned elsewhere as I said you cannot place todays values on historical context, equally you cannot put historical mores into todays context, or you end up with what Isis does,  That does NOT make them "true followers, but fundamentalists and thus WRONG.

Original Quill wrote:

gelico wrote:


there's only ONE 'religion' - as far as i am aware - that calls for anyone who wants to leave it to be killed

please correct me if i'm wrong on that

I assume you are referring to Scientology.

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Miffs2 wrote:

They consider themselves to be true Muslims. If a couple of refusals to bury is the extent of the resistance to the terrorists in your religion then you have problems.

What you are not understanding is that as a ‘true’ Muslim the burial is as important as the act of living.

Original Quill wrote:

gelico wrote:


there's only ONE 'religion' - as far as i am aware - that calls for anyone who wants to leave it to be killed

please correct me if i'm wrong on that

I assume you are referring to Scientology.

gelico wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

that's patently incorrect.

the KKK are not inspired by religious text but by the idea of racial segregation and white supremacy,the religion of the members is a moot point expect of course for Judaism, the KKK idiots seem to associate all Jews with the Jewish ethnicity rather than the religious beliefs.

likewise the westboro church cannot point to any biblical passage to justify their views

the qur'an by contrast, was written by a mass murdering psychopath that openly justifies murder terrorism and all the delights we see from the religion of peace.

in Syria and Iraq ISIS were crucifying and mutilating the bodies of "spies" before killing them.

why where they doing that?? because that is what the qur'an tells them to do with "those who make mischief in the land"

Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

that shit went down under ISIS, so how can they not be real Muslims following real Islam??

SM doesn't drink alcohol because the same book that tells ISIS to do the shit they do, tells her that alcohol is forbidden

i guess that means SM isn't a real Muslim then huh??  

as to what Isis do, that is the nature of fundamentalism, they seek justification by the reverse of what I mentioned elsewhere as I said you cannot place todays values on historical context, equally you cannot put historical mores into todays context, or you end up with what Isis does,  That does NOT make them "true followers, but fundamentalists and thus WRONG.

all very well to say ''you cannot'' but you have described Islam in it's fundamental form ie the teachings of Mohammed which is why all Islamic countries will be ruled by sharia law.  ALL their laws are based on what happened 1400 years ago, which is why there is such strict punishments meted out. it is considered perfect for all time,,,,,

and yes, it is savage and barbaric,

they are the true followers of mohammed and the sharia.

Muslims anywhere else who have integrated and want to live in peace with others (kuffars) are not considered to be real Muslims by the standard of the sharia

SEXY MAMA wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

you are wrong

however, the other religions have undergone social and cultural reformations to "update" them to be more appropriate with an evolving human consciousness

you would be correct to say that there is only one religion that STILL calls for anyone who wants to leave it to be killed

Really?

Where does it state this in the Quran?

Weve had this debate before Smelly and you still haven’t learnt anuthing

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Probably none.  Christianity was an acquired religion from their masters.

even under slavery blacks embraced Christianity either through being born into the religion or as a result of conversion, willing or otherwise, the fact remains that many blacks to this day in America and throughout Africa are very devoutly christian  

the KKK in the picture could not be killing those black men out of some religious fanaticism, religion doesn't recognize race, yet the KKK were exclusively against blacks christian or otherwise, a white atheist would be not be treated as badly as black christian by the KKK

you are trying to establish a link with the KKK's actions and their religion with the same argument that you use to deny the link between the actions of ISIS and their religion

ie you claim the KKK are christian terrorists whilst ignoring the fact that they kill other Christians but claim that ISIS cannot be Muslim terrorist BECAUSE they kill other Muslims

Readex Report wrote:
Religion and the Rise of the Second Ku Klux Klan, 1915-1922

Kelly J. Baker, Instructor, University of New Mexico

In 1915, the second incarnation of the Ku Klux Klan was born. The second Klan, a memorial to the Reconstruction Klan and its work in the postbellum South, was to act as a restructured fraternity that supported white supremacy, the purity of white womanhood, nationalism and Protestant Christianity. William J. Simmons, a fraternalist and former minister, organized the charter for the new order and consecrated its beginning by setting afire a cross on the top of Stone Mountain, Georgia.

gelico wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I assume you are referring to Scientology.

i haven't read any of the scientology holy scriptures to be honest so i wouldn't know

Original Quill wrote:

gelico wrote:

i haven't read any of the scientology holy scriptures to be honest so i wouldn't know

They certainly go after anyone who leaves.  They are the first group of that ilk, that comes to mind.

gelico wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:



Really?

Where does it state this in the Quran?

Weve had this debate before Smelly and you still haven’t learnt anuthing

Hadith and Sira

The most reliable Hadith collection contain numerous accounts of Muhammad and his companions putting people to death for leaving Islam. According to verse 4:80 of the Quran: "Those who obey the Messenger obey Allah."

Sahih Bukhari (52:260) - "...The Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' "

Sahih Bukhari (83:37) - "Allah's Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate."

Sahih Bukhari (84:57) - [In the words of] "Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

Sahih Bukhari (89:271) - A man who embraces Islam, then reverts to Judaism is to be killed according to "the verdict of Allah and his apostle."

Original Quill wrote:

gelico wrote:


Hadith and Sira

The most reliable Hadith collection contain numerous accounts of Muhammad and his companions putting people to death for leaving Islam. According to verse 4:80 of the Quran: "Those who obey the Messenger obey Allah."

Sahih Bukhari (52:260) - "...The Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' "

Sahih Bukhari (83:37) - "Allah's Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate."

Sahih Bukhari (84:57) - [In the words of] "Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

Sahih Bukhari (89:271) - A man who embraces Islam, then reverts to Judaism is to be killed according to "the verdict of Allah and his apostle."

Reverse engineering your own ideas into the text.  We experience it every Sunday when the TV evangelicals come on the air.  The Bible is just another book.  You could do the same thing with Winny the Pooh, if it had the correct following.

Lord Foul wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

that's patently incorrect.

the KKK are not inspired by religious text but by the idea of racial segregation and white supremacy,the religion of the members is a moot point expect of course for Judaism, the KKK idiots seem to associate all Jews with the Jewish ethnicity rather than the religious beliefs.

likewise the westboro church cannot point to any biblical passage to justify their views

the qur'an by contrast, was written by a mass murdering psychopath that openly justifies murder terrorism and all the delights we see from the religion of peace.

in Syria and Iraq ISIS were crucifying and mutilating the bodies of "spies" before killing them.

why where they doing that?? because that is what the qur'an tells them to do with "those who make mischief in the land"

Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

that shit went down under ISIS, so how can they not be real Muslims following real Islam??

SM doesn't drink alcohol because the same book that tells ISIS to do the shit they do, tells her that alcohol is forbidden

i guess that means SM isn't a real Muslim then huh??  

shows just how little you know, sat there in your own little world.....

the KKK (and most other racist groups, use the biblical concept to the "mark of cain" to justify their "superiority" considering the "mark of cain" to be black skin

as to what Isis do, that is the nature of fundamentalism, they seek justification by the reverse of what I mentioned elsewhere as I said you cannot place todays values on historical context, equally you cannot put historical mores into todays context, or you end up with what Isis does,  That does NOT make them "true followers, but fundamentalists and thus WRONG. you are wrong in trying to plce todays values on the peopl of 1400 years ago, calling them savage...well yes....but it was a savage world, even more so than today, and you didnt last long as a leader by beinh anything OTHER than savage yourself.

when was the last time you beat one of your kids to death huh smelly?? which as a "good christian" you are entitled to do?

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Miffs2 wrote:

Agreed, but I believe Muslim terrorists differ as they do it to please their God believing they will go to heaven bla bla bla

If that was the case the Imams wouldn’t be condemning it would they?

They don’t even allow them Muslim burials.

Think about it.

Tommy Monk wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

If that was the case the Imams wouldn’t be condemning it would they?

They don’t even allow them Muslim burials.

Think about it.

Can you show us a list of 'Muslim terrorists' who were said to be denied 'Muslim burials' and who then didn't end up having a 'Muslim burial'...?

smelly-bandit wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

shows just how little you know, sat there in your own little world.....

the KKK (and most other racist groups, use the biblical concept to the "mark of cain" to justify their "superiority" considering the "mark of cain" to be black skin

as to what Isis do, that is the nature of fundamentalism, they seek justification by the reverse of what I mentioned elsewhere as I said you cannot place todays values on historical context, equally you cannot put historical mores into todays context, or you end up with what Isis does,  That does NOT make them "true followers, but fundamentalists and thus WRONG. you are wrong in trying to plce todays values on the peopl of 1400 years ago, calling them savage...well yes....but it was a savage world, even more so than today, and you didnt last long as a leader by beinh anything OTHER than savage yourself.

when was the last time you beat one of your kids to death huh smelly?? which as a "good christian" you are entitled to do?

seeking racial superiority is not the evil you think it is,the human condition is hard wired towards competition

every race should be wanting to achieve superiority, fuck me can you imagine if the race race was conducted as cordially as the Olympics?? mankind would have colonized mars by now.

racial supremacy has turned ugly because of the ugly people involved and the ugly methods used to pursue the end objective. Even ISIS wouldnt be the evil they are if their method were peaceful would they??

im not retroactively judging anyone or anything, ISIS however ARE retroactively applying the edicts and tenants of a 7th century religion in a modern world and they are therefore the exact embodiment of the pure form of 7th century Islam as it was practiced under Mohammad, thus they are RIGHT and you are WRONG, unless of course you are going to suggest that FOLLOWING the commands of your holy book is somehow going against the commands of your religion??

with ISIS, and indeed many Muslim in the west today ,we are in effect getting a glimpse into the past and therefore true nature of islam.

as for beating kids to death under Christianity?? that is exactly where your argument is sound, that command and many others like them have been reformed, updated, modernized so that the values of 2000 years ago are not being shoe horned into the modern era, but instead have been shaped so as to fit in with the values of today, that foul is specifically why you don't have a problem with christian parents beatings beating their kids to death for back chatting them or any of the hundreds of outdated practices in the bible

islam has not undergone such a reformation, and until it does we can expect nothing but more ISIS

Lord Foul wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:Is Killing An Apostate in the Islamic Law?

Due lack of education and critical thinking several myths or misconceptions have taken root in the Muslim world over the ages. No efforts have been made to clear them.  On the contrary, there has been a sort of effort to strengthen these myths and misconceptions.  This has resulted in a misplaced perception that Islam is a symbol of obscurantism, a religion of intolerance and answers everything with the sword.

One grave misunderstanding of Islamic beliefs over the years is that Islam doesn’t tolerate apostasy. The Christian missionaries and the Western world are cashing in on it.  Ulama have tried to strengthen their point of view and several leading Muslim reformists have failed to tackle the issue. This misconception has also presented Islam as a medieval and killer religion. Islam bashers have time and again tried to paint the picture that Islam orders the killing of a person if he or she reverts to another religion from Islam.

The Qur’an is completely silent on any worldly punishment for apostasy and the sole Tradition that forms the basis of rulings is open to many interpretations.
Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said: “Whosoever changes his religion, Kill Him (man baddala Dinahu faqtuluhu)”. It is this quote from the Prophet that forms the basis of the said ruling.

But this is a weak foundation because this hadith was only transmitted from Muhammad (pbuh) by one individual. It was not confirmed by a second person. According to Islamic law, this is insufficient confirmation to impose the death penalty. The Shari`ah has not fixed any punishment for apostasy.

The hadith is so generally worded that it would require the death penalty for a Christian or Jew who converted to Islam. This is obviously not the prophet’s intent. The hadith is in need of further specification, which has not been documented. Many scholars interpret this passage as referring only to instances of high treason. (e.g. declaring war on Islam, Muhammad (pbuh), God, etc.). There is no historical record, which indicates that Muhammad (pbuh) or any of his companions ever sentenced anyone to death for apostasy.

There was a case at the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) where a man came to him in three consecutive days and told him that he wanted to apostate. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) never took any action against him, and when the man finally left Madina, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) never sent anyone to arrest him, let alone kill him.

This is why some scholars distinguished between individual apostasy and apostasy which is accompanied by high treason. So, it cannot be confused with the freedom of conscience for every individual, which has been guaranteed in the Qur’an through hundreds of verses.  For example, one version of a hadith narrated by `A’isha (RA) concerning apostasy relates to one who left his religion and fought against Muslims.

Scholars argue that the death sentence is not for “simple apostasy” (mujarrad al-ridda), but for apostasy accompanied by treason and sedition, or by the abuse and slander (sabb) of the Noble Prophet.


Freedom to convert to or from Islam

Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.”

The Glorious Qur’an says, “Let there be no compulsion in the religion: Surely the Right Path is clearly distinct from the crooked path.” Al Baqarah, 2:256.

“Those who believe, then disbelieve, then believe again, then disbelieve, and then increase in their disbelief - Allah will never forgive them nor guide them to the path.” Surah An-Nisa’, 4:137.

For example, the Qur’an says: “Let him who wishes to believe, do so; and let him who wishes to disbelieve, do so.” (Al-Kahf: 29)

The quotation from Surah An-Nisa’, 4:137, shown above, seems to imply that multiple, sequential apostasies are possible. That would not be possible if the person were executed after the first apostasy.

From the above verses it can be argued that religious freedom and the absence of compulsion in religion requires that individuals be allowed adopt a religion or to convert to another religion without legal penalty. Hence the death penalty is not an appropriate response to apostasy.

The former Chief Justice of Pakistan, SA Rahman, has written that there is no reference to the death penalty in any of the 20 instances of apostasy mentioned in the Qur’an.
QUR’ANIC VIEWS

The Qur’an has referred to the issue of apostasy at more than one place (for example see Al-Baqarah 2: 217, Al-Baqarah 2: 108, A?l Imra?n 3: 90, Al-Nisa? 4: 137 and Al-Nahl 16: 106). But at none of these places does the Qur’an mention the punishment of death for such people who change their religion. The Qur’an does mention that such people shall face a terrible punishment in the hereafter but no worldly punishment is mentioned at any of these instances in the Qur’an. This situation obviously raises a question mark in the mind of the reader that if Allah had wanted to give the punishment of an apostate a permanent position in the Shari`ah, the punishment should have been mentioned, at least at one of the above mentioned places.

Furthermore, the Qur’an has strictly disallowed the imposition of the death penalty except in two specific cases. One of them is where the person is guilty of murdering another person and the other is where a person is guilty of creating unrest in the country (fasa’d fil-ardh) like being involved in activities that create unrest in a society, for example activities like terrorism etc. The Qur’an says:  Whoever kills a person without his being guilty of murder or of creating unrest in the land, is as though he kills the whole of mankind. (Al-Ma?idah, 5: 32)

Obviously, apostasy can neither be termed as “murder” nor “creating unrest in the land”.  Thus, in view of the above facts, we are left with one option only. We can only say that either the hadith has been wrongly ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh), as it is clearly contradictory to the Qur’an.

Original Quill wrote:

Miffs2 wrote:

Normal terrorism? To what end?

Most hostilities begin in the culture, not as Clausewitz claimed, in reason and statesmanship.  Our hostility was probably begun in the post-war period, when Britain gave leave to Israel to have a go at land acquisition.  This began the cultural hostility between the people of the Levant and the US + Western Europe (the US having inherited the Big Dog status from Britain).

Western guilt with the Jewish people was so great that we, the west, turned our head on the atrocities that this represented.  Or, perhaps it was the same old racism, where the status of European Jews was slightly above brown-skinned Palestinians, so we gave the nod.

Terrorism is a tactic.  So "normal terrorism" is normal use of a tactic.  Can you imagine a "normal" M-16?  A normal AK-47?  Normal terrorism is use of a weapon by anyone.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

seeking racial superiority is not the evil you think it is,the human condition is hard wired towards competition

every race should be wanting to achieve superiority, fuck me can you imagine if the race race was conducted as cordially as the Olympics?? mankind would have colonized mars by now.

racial supremacy has turned ugly because of the ugly people involved and the ugly methods used to pursue the end objective. Even ISIS wouldnt be the evil they are if their method were peaceful would they??

im not retroactively judging anyone or anything, ISIS however ARE retroactively applying the edicts and tenants of a 7th century religion in a modern world and they are therefore the exact embodiment of the pure form of 7th century Islam as it was practiced under Mohammad, thus they are RIGHT and you are WRONG, unless of course you are going to suggest that FOLLOWING the commands of your holy book is somehow going against the commands of your religion??

with ISIS, and indeed many Muslim in the west today ,we are in effect getting a glimpse into the past and therefore true nature of islam.

as for beating kids to death under Christianity?? that is exactly where your argument is sound, that command and many others like them have been reformed, updated, modernized so that the values of 2000 years ago are not being shoe horned into the modern era, but instead have been shaped so as to fit in with the values of today, that foul is specifically why you don't have a problem with christian parents beatings beating their kids to death for back chatting them or any of the hundreds of outdated practices in the bible

islam has not undergone such a reformation, and until it does we can expect nothing but more ISIS

Neo-Nazi propaganda.  Not a scintilla of authority.  It's Donny 'two-times' all over again.

smelly-bandit wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:Is Killing An Apostate in the Islamic Law?

Due lack of education and critical thinking several myths or misconceptions have taken root in the Muslim world over the ages. No efforts have been made to clear them.  On the contrary, there has been a sort of effort to strengthen these myths and misconceptions.  This has resulted in a misplaced perception that Islam is a symbol of obscurantism, a religion of intolerance and answers everything with the sword.

One grave misunderstanding of Islamic beliefs over the years is that Islam doesn’t tolerate apostasy. The Christian missionaries and the Western world are cashing in on it.  Ulama have tried to strengthen their point of view and several leading Muslim reformists have failed to tackle the issue. This misconception has also presented Islam as a medieval and killer religion. Islam bashers have time and again tried to paint the picture that Islam orders the killing of a person if he or she reverts to another religion from Islam.

The Qur’an is completely silent on any worldly punishment for apostasy and the sole Tradition that forms the basis of rulings is open to many interpretations.
Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said: “Whosoever changes his religion, Kill Him (man baddala Dinahu faqtuluhu)”. It is this quote from the Prophet that forms the basis of the said ruling.

But this is a weak foundation because this hadith was only transmitted from Muhammad (pbuh) by one individual. It was not confirmed by a second person. According to Islamic law, this is insufficient confirmation to impose the death penalty. The Shari`ah has not fixed any punishment for apostasy.

The hadith is so generally worded that it would require the death penalty for a Christian or Jew who converted to Islam. This is obviously not the prophet’s intent. The hadith is in need of further specification, which has not been documented. Many scholars interpret this passage as referring only to instances of high treason. (e.g. declaring war on Islam, Muhammad (pbuh), God, etc.). There is no historical record, which indicates that Muhammad (pbuh) or any of his companions ever sentenced anyone to death for apostasy.

There was a case at the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) where a man came to him in three consecutive days and told him that he wanted to apostate. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) never took any action against him, and when the man finally left Madina, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) never sent anyone to arrest him, let alone kill him.

This is why some scholars distinguished between individual apostasy and apostasy which is accompanied by high treason. So, it cannot be confused with the freedom of conscience for every individual, which has been guaranteed in the Qur’an through hundreds of verses.  For example, one version of a hadith narrated by `A’isha (RA) concerning apostasy relates to one who left his religion and fought against Muslims.

Scholars argue that the death sentence is not for “simple apostasy” (mujarrad al-ridda), but for apostasy accompanied by treason and sedition, or by the abuse and slander (sabb) of the Noble Prophet.


Freedom to convert to or from Islam

Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.”

The Glorious Qur’an says, “Let there be no compulsion in the religion: Surely the Right Path is clearly distinct from the crooked path.” Al Baqarah, 2:256.

“Those who believe, then disbelieve, then believe again, then disbelieve, and then increase in their disbelief - Allah will never forgive them nor guide them to the path.” Surah An-Nisa’, 4:137.

For example, the Qur’an says: “Let him who wishes to believe, do so; and let him who wishes to disbelieve, do so.” (Al-Kahf: 29)

The quotation from Surah An-Nisa’, 4:137, shown above, seems to imply that multiple, sequential apostasies are possible. That would not be possible if the person were executed after the first apostasy.

From the above verses it can be argued that religious freedom and the absence of compulsion in religion requires that individuals be allowed adopt a religion or to convert to another religion without legal penalty. Hence the death penalty is not an appropriate response to apostasy.

The former Chief Justice of Pakistan, SA Rahman, has written that there is no reference to the death penalty in any of the 20 instances of apostasy mentioned in the Qur’an.
QUR’ANIC VIEWS

The Qur’an has referred to the issue of apostasy at more than one place (for example see Al-Baqarah 2: 217, Al-Baqarah 2: 108, A?l Imra?n 3: 90, Al-Nisa? 4: 137 and Al-Nahl 16: 106). But at none of these places does the Qur’an mention the punishment of death for such people who change their religion. The Qur’an does mention that such people shall face a terrible punishment in the hereafter but no worldly punishment is mentioned at any of these instances in the Qur’an. This situation obviously raises a question mark in the mind of the reader that if Allah had wanted to give the punishment of an apostate a permanent position in the Shari`ah, the punishment should have been mentioned, at least at one of the above mentioned places.

Furthermore, the Qur’an has strictly disallowed the imposition of the death penalty except in two specific cases. One of them is where the person is guilty of murdering another person and the other is where a person is guilty of creating unrest in the country (fasa’d fil-ardh) like being involved in activities that create unrest in a society, for example activities like terrorism etc. The Qur’an says:  Whoever kills a person without his being guilty of murder or of creating unrest in the land, is as though he kills the whole of mankind. (Al-Ma?idah, 5: 32)

Obviously, apostasy can neither be termed as “murder” nor “creating unrest in the land”.  Thus, in view of the above facts, we are left with one option only. We can only say that either the hadith has been wrongly ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh), as it is clearly contradictory to the Qur’an.

Sahih Bukhari (52:260) - "...The Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' "

gelico wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Reverse engineering your own ideas into the text.  We experience it every Sunday when the TV evangelicals come on the air.  The Bible is just another book.  You could do the same thing with Winny the Pooh, if it had the correct following.

what does that even mean?  what does any of it mean?  i've just provided the apostacy law as requested

smelly-bandit wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

that's patently incorrect.

the KKK are not inspired by religious text but by the idea of racial segregation and white supremacy,the religion of the members is a moot point expect of course for Judaism, the KKK idiots seem to associate all Jews with the Jewish ethnicity rather than the religious beliefs.

likewise the westboro church cannot point to any biblical passage to justify their views

the qur'an by contrast, was written by a mass murdering psychopath that openly justifies murder terrorism and all the delights we see from the religion of peace.

in Syria and Iraq ISIS were crucifying and mutilating the bodies of "spies" before killing them.

why where they doing that?? because that is what the qur'an tells them to do with "those who make mischief in the land"

Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

that shit went down under ISIS, so how can they not be real Muslims following real Islam??

SM doesn't drink alcohol because the same book that tells ISIS to do the shit they do, tells her that alcohol is forbidden

i guess that means SM isn't a real Muslim then huh??  

shows just how little you know, sat there in your own little world.....

the KKK (and most other racist groups, use the biblical concept to the "mark of cain" to justify their "superiority" considering the "mark of cain" to be black skin

as to what Isis do, that is the nature of fundamentalism, they seek justification by the reverse of what I mentioned elsewhere as I said you cannot place todays values on historical context, equally you cannot put historical mores into todays context, or you end up with what Isis does,  That does NOT make them "true followers, but fundamentalists and thus WRONG. you are wrong in trying to plce todays values on the peopl of 1400 years ago, calling them savage...well yes....but it was a savage world, even more so than today, and you didnt last long as a leader by beinh anything OTHER than savage yourself.

when was the last time you beat one of your kids to death huh smelly?? which as a "good christian" you are entitled to do?

seeking racial superiority is not the evil you think it is,the human condition is hard wired towards competition

every race should be wanting to achieve superiority, fuck me can you imagine if the race race was conducted as cordially as the Olympics?? mankind would have colonized mars by now.

and if we had all cooperated togather we would be colonising the exo planets...

racial supremacy has turned ugly because of the ugly people involved and the ugly methods used to pursue the end objective. Even ISIS wouldnt be the evil they are if their method were peaceful would they??

a moot point since by definition isis is predicated on domination, not cooperation...

im not retroactively judging anyone or anything, ISIS however ARE retroactively applying the edicts and tenants of a 7th century religion in a modern world and they are therefore the exact embodiment of the pure form of 7th century Islam as it was practiced under Mohammad, thus they are RIGHT and you are WRONG, unless of course you are going to suggest that FOLLOWING the commands of your holy book is somehow going against the commands of your religion??

with ISIS, and indeed many Muslim in the west today ,we are in effect getting a glimpse into the past and therefore true nature of islam.

as for beating kids to death under Christianity?? that is exactly where your argument is sound, that command and many others like them have been reformed, updated, modernized so that the values of 2000 years ago are not being shoe horned into the modern era, but instead have been shaped so as to fit in with the values of today, that foul is specifically why you don't have a problem with christian parents beatings beating their kids to death for back chatting them or any of the hundreds of outdated practices in the bible

this negates your argument highlighted in blue by answering your last question therein

islam has not undergone such a reformation, and until it does we can expect nothing but more ISIS

gelico wrote:i wonder why it is that every Muslim that Maajid Nawaz tries to drag into this century either is abusive to him or agrees with a lot of what he says but insist that the sharia cannot be altered?

I wonder why it is that ex Muslims in islamic countries have had to flee for their lives?

I wonder why you see Imams all over the internet preaching death to apostates, jews, gays and kuffars in general

they've all just misunderstood Islam is all

Miffs2 wrote:

gelico wrote:i wonder why it is that every Muslim that Maajid Nawaz tries to drag into this century either is abusive to him or agrees with a lot of what he says but insist that the sharia cannot be altered?

I wonder why it is that ex Muslims in islamic countries have had to flee for their lives?

I wonder why you see Imams all over the internet preaching death to apostates, jews, gays and kuffars in general

they've all just misunderstood Islam is all

They are not true Muslims us all

SEXY MAMA wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

Sahih Bukhari (52:260) - "...The Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' "

Obviously you cannot read and understand the above.

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


Can you show us a list of 'Muslim terrorists' who were said to be denied 'Muslim burials' and who then didn't end up having a 'Muslim burial'...?

Check it out for yourself,

It’s been documented here.

smelly-bandit wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Obviously you cannot read and understand the above.

i understand it perfectly well,its nonsense that leans of the fact that since there isn't any specific command in the qur'an per se it means that its not prescribed,but it then misleads the reader by quoting suras from the meccan period where Muhammad, against all odds practiced his religion peacefully and attempted to woe willing followers to his cause to justify this view.

that was very early on in his career and that period was overshadowed by what came later on,the practice of abrogation which forms the entire basis of your religion comes into effect and the result is the forced conversion and death for apostasy stuff that we see today

furthermore Islamic jurisprudence is reliant on both the qur'an and the hadiths, and where one issue is unclear the resolution is found in either the qur'an or the hadith depending on which jurisprudence is being used.

point in case, stoning to death or whipping for adultery, some sharia courts rule that whipping is the ordained punishment since this can be found in the qur'an whilst other rule that stoning is correct since this is found in the hadiths  

both are correct.

the hadiths are as authoritative as the qur'an is, even more so when the actions of Muslims reflect the what muhhamad did rather than what he "revealed"
 

Lord Foul wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

seeking racial superiority is not the evil you think it is,the human condition is hard wired towards competition

every race should be wanting to achieve superiority, fuck me can you imagine if the race race was conducted as cordially as the Olympics?? mankind would have colonized mars by now.

and if we had all cooperated togather we would be colonising the exo planets...

racial supremacy has turned ugly because of the ugly people involved and the ugly methods used to pursue the end objective. Even ISIS wouldnt be the evil they are if their method were peaceful would they??

a moot point since by definition isis is predicated on domination, not cooperation...

im not retroactively judging anyone or anything, ISIS however ARE retroactively applying the edicts and tenants of a 7th century religion in a modern world and they are therefore the exact embodiment of the pure form of 7th century Islam as it was practiced under Mohammad, thus they are RIGHT and you are WRONG, unless of course you are going to suggest that FOLLOWING the commands of your holy book is somehow going against the commands of your religion??

with ISIS, and indeed many Muslim in the west today ,we are in effect getting a glimpse into the past and therefore true nature of islam.

as for beating kids to death under Christianity?? that is exactly where your argument is sound, that command and many others like them have been reformed, updated, modernized so that the values of 2000 years ago are not being shoe horned into the modern era, but instead have been shaped so as to fit in with the values of today, that foul is specifically why you don't have a problem with christian parents beatings beating their kids to death for back chatting them or any of the hundreds of outdated practices in the bible

this negates your argument highlighted in blue by answering your last question therein

islam has not undergone such a reformation, and until it does we can expect nothing but more ISIS

untill of course we adopt a policy of helping those Muslims who HAVE reformed to flourish and thus marginalise unto non existance those who havnt....and even then it still wont be a clear cut thing  (there are still christians who think bombing an abortion clinic the right thing to do)

SEXY MAMA wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

i understand it perfectly well,its nonsense that leans of the fact that since there isn't any specific command in the qur'an per se it means that its not prescribed,but it then misleads the reader by quoting suras from the meccan period where Muhammad, against all odds practiced his religion peacefully and attempted to woe willing followers to his cause to justify this view.

that was very early on in his career and that period was overshadowed by what came later on,the practice of abrogation which forms the entire basis of your religion comes into effect and the result is the forced conversion and death for apostasy stuff that we see today

furthermore Islamic jurisprudence is reliant on both the qur'an and the hadiths, and where one issue is unclear the resolution is found in either the qur'an or the hadith depending on which jurisprudence is being used.

point in case, stoning to death or whipping for adultery, some sharia courts rule that whipping is the ordained punishment since this can be found in the qur'an whilst other rule that stoning is correct since this is found in the hadiths  

both are correct.

the hadiths are as authoritative as the qur'an is, even more so when the actions of Muslims reflect the what muhhamad did rather than what he "revealed"
 

Do you know what the last sura is in the Quran?

We have been over the punishment law years ago haven't we Smelly? In regards to the changing of times haven't we? Or have you forgotten it all conveniently?

Some Hadiths are weak and they are not deemed permissible

smelly-bandit wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Do you know what the last sura is in the Quran?

We have been over the punishment law years ago haven't we Smelly? In regards to the changing of times haven't we? Or have you forgotten it all conveniently?

Some Hadiths are weak and they are not deemed permissible

no SM i haven't forgotten it at all

i vividly remember you being shown the result of a beating for adultery and going all green round the gills and suddenly changing your mind on the issue.

in fact im still waiting for you to post the sura that says you can adapt and interpret the qur'an to be acceptable for a modern setting.

i know that some hadiths are weaker than others, but even that is disputed, however you know as well as i do that there are a series of hadiths that are widely accepted written by scholars who are deemed authentic and reliable, and it is exclusively these hadiths that i use