America is already a "Sharia Compliant State"

[logical4u]

There are many famous figures in the Bible such as Moses or Abraham or Noah.

Most of them were Prophets.

But not all of them did miracles.

Muhammad first and foremost was a Prophet.

That was his mission on earth.

There was no prophet in the Bible that went to 'war' for personal gain and power (it was always to glorify the Lord or they lost). You have read the Bible, maybe you could show me in error.

Several Old Testament prophets went to war for land and riches.

You really need to read your Bible and get back with me .

For their own personal gain? get back to me.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Sharia is an amalgam of religion, quasi-legal doctrine, and traditional cultural practices.

To refer to it as ‘law’ at all is a misnomer.

 

[Sunni Man]

There was no prophet in the Bible that went to 'war' for personal gain and power (it was always to glorify the Lord or they lost). You have read the Bible, maybe you could show me in error.

Several Old Testament prophets went to war for land and riches.

You really need to read your Bible and get back with me .

For their own personal gain? get back to me.

King David and King Solomon were both Prophets in the Old Testament.

The Bible says the king Solomon was the richest man in the world.

Both fought wars which resulted in slaves, land, and treasure.

Again, You need to read your Bible because you are not dealing with an amateur when you discuss the Bible with me.y

 

[logical4u]

Is it true the word love is not in the quran?

The word love (hubb) is mentioned in the Qur'an 69 times.

The word is mentioned many times as a verb and as a noun. these are some examples of God's love for the righteous: as a verb: 2:195 2:222 3:76 3:134 3:148 3:159 5:42

Answers.com

Isn't that translated as 'peace' too? That could reference world domination of islam before there is peace (forced of course).??

 

[logical4u]

Several Old Testament prophets went to war for land and riches.

You really need to read your Bible and get back with me .

For their own personal gain? get back to me.

King David and King Solomon were both Prophets in the Old Testament.

The Bible says the king Solomon was the richest man in the world.

Both fought wars which resulted in slaves, land, and trrasure.

Again, You need to read your Bible because you are not dealing with an amateur when you discuss the Bible with me.

David served the Lord. He was king and gained for all his people. Solomon asked the Lord for wisdom and was blessed in all things because it pleased the Lord. They did not go out and attack enemies without reason (they were defending their territory or following instructions from the Lord, and in many instances, used the arc of the covenant as a weapon: the Lord, Himself went into battle with them). What symbol did Allah give Mohammed as a standard? Maybe you need to reread the Bible and try to comprehend it, instead of looking for anything similar and claim that makes it the same. A goat and a horse both have four legs, they are similar, but they are not the same.

 

[daveman]

For real. I have no interest in dictating what my wife may wear or seeing her be beaten because her wrist became exposed in public.

I have great respect for you Con....err.....The Brain

The way that you hacked into the board and shut it down the other day was awesome.

I mean everybody knows that it was you.

But we know that you can't take credit for it.

Because you will get bannrd.

I have great respect for you, Sunni.

The way you suck goat balls is very masterful.

I mean everybody knows you're great at it.

But we know that you can't take credit for it.

Because you will get arrested.

 

[logical4u]

The Constitution and Sharia Law would be very compatible.

Basically, the Constitution is an abstract that gives the basic framework for our nation.

And Sharia Law would inact the "Rights" that the Constitution guarantees for all Americans.

Again, where does the quran encourage liberty, equal justice and the pursuit of hapiness? If it isn't in there they are not compatible.
paraphrasing
freedom of speech vs no one can speak against islam or their diety mohammed

the right to bear arms vs islam will cut your arm/hand off

the gov't can't move in your house vs we can tell you how to dress inside your house

protection from unreasonalbe searches vs if you are not muslim this does not apply to you

don't have to witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. vs if you are not muslim this does not apply to you, "muslims" have the right to take whatever belongs to a person of another religion (as long as you kill the male household member, first).

right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury vs if you are not muslim this does not apply to you


The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. vs if you are not muslim this does not apply to you
y
Can you show where this would be different, sunni? did you join islam to be part of the 'legion' (you read the Bible, you should know what that means)?

You brought up so many questions that I don't have the two hours to answer them.

I am being polite and calling them questions but they are more like accusations.

Btw Nobody tells Muslims how they must dress inside their house.

Those were part of the Bill of Rights. Islam does not have a Bill of Rights. It teaches to oppress, kill, convert those you do not agree with (religion). How is that compatible to the Constitution that teaches that each individual has rights granted by the 'Creator' (not the Destroyer).

 

[daveman]

Sunni Man - although written by a Christian, the conflict references to a Sharia/USA constitution are noteworthy.

Sharia Law and the U.S. Constitution | The American Catholic

As an aside, I have a direct question; can Sharia exist without Islam?

Everyone here keeps talking about Islam and sharia law as it's practiced in other countries.

The American version of sharia law will be unique and different.

And would reflect American traditions and culture.

Both Germany and France are democracies that have laws based on Judeo Christian norms like America.

Yet they're court proceedings and the way that they have trials are totally different than the way it is practiced in America.

So again, sharia law and America will be unique and reflect our values as Americans.

If it reflects American traditions and culture, it can't be Sharia.

I repeat: Quit screeching that we should adopt your backwards barbarity and move someplace that's already backwards and barbaric.

 

[Sunni Man]

Excuses, Excuses, Excuses............

Logical4u

You just hate like heck to admit that I am right.

But that's okay cause we both know I am.

 

[daveman]

Yep, avoid and deflect. That's what I would do if I were you.

By the way, IF I had the technical know how to hack a message board, and the willingness to do so, why would I be worried about being banned?

Hey we all know that you have to cover your tracks.

But the general consensus is that it was you is shut down the board.

I believe it myself

Yes, but look at the amazingly stupid stuff you believe, like "America is already a 'Sharia Compliant State'".

 

[daveman]

Excuses, Excuses, Excuses............

Logical4u

You just hate like heck to admit that I am right.

But that's okay cause we both know I am.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Just what i expected from you, denial of the violation of the human rights of women. How is revealing that a country has a law against women riding in the passenger areas of vehicles, hatemongering? Or are you referring to the hate mongering done by muslims against women in the ME? You are quick to throw out how dangerous this country is to women while DENYING what happens under sharia law.

The issue of this thread is the inane and erroneous proposition that Sharia comports to Constitutional case law, not the merits of Islam as a faith.

Indeed, the violations noted in the quote above predate Islam and are components of a pagan cultural paradigm having nothing to do with Islam per se.

 

[logical4u]

Excuses, Excuses, Excuses............

Logical4u

You just hate like heck to admit that I am right.

But that's okay cause we both know I am.

Islam teaches the muslims are the Lord's chosen. What standard did he give them? What standard did he instruct them to set at the head of their armies? What evidence of a covenant did Mohammed have? Death, destruction, deceit, sounds like that other guy to me.

If the arc went into battle and the Israelites were victorious, it is hard to deny the Lord was with them, isn't it? When the Israelites worshipped the arc and took it into battles as a diety on its own, what happened" (Hint: they got their asses kicked)

When Yeshua came, he taught to spread the faith with LOVE. Where did Mohammed demonstrate LOVE for anyone other than himself? He made a new "legion" and used threats, intimidation, torture and death to convert. How is that similar to the 'prophet' Yeshua that islam claims as their own? If He is 'their prophet' why don't they follow His teachings?

 

[logical4u]

Just what i expected from you, denial of the violation of the human rights of women. How is revealing that a country has a law against women riding in the passenger areas of vehicles, hatemongering? Or are you referring to the hate mongering done by muslims against women in the ME? You are quick to throw out how dangerous this country is to women while DENYING what happens under sharia law.

The issue of this thread is the inane and erroneous proposition that Sharia comports to Constitutional case law, not the merits of Islam as a faith.

Indeed, the violations noted in the quote above predate Islam and are components of a pagan cultural paradigm having nothing to do with Islam per se.

Yet the ONLY places you find this is under "islamic law". If islam treats women with dignity, wouldn't laws like this be eliminated?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Yet the ONLY places you find this is under "islamic law". If islam treats women with dignity, wouldn't laws like this be eliminated?

What’s the dissonance between Judeo-Christian tenets and how people are actually treated in the West? What social ills in the US do we blame on Christianity? And do we hold religious leaders accountable for failed or oppressive government practices?

The failure to protect women from abuse in such countries is the failure of the secular governments of those countries because they don’t accept the principle of the rule of law and the exclusion of religion from governance; that’s not the fault of Islam.

 

[Vel]

Yet the ONLY places you find this is under "islamic law". If islam treats women with dignity, wouldn't laws like this be eliminated?

What’s the dissonance between Judeo-Christian tenets and how people are actually treated in the West? What social ills in the US do we blame on Christianity? And do we hold religious leaders accountable for failed or oppressive government practices?

The failure to protect women from abuse in such countries is the failure of the secular governments of those countries because they don’t accept the principle of the rule of law and the exclusion of religion from governance; that’s not the fault of Islam.

We blame the social ills in many ME countries on Islam BECAUSE those countries DON'T have secular governments and DO base their legal systems on sharia ( islamic ) law. Sharia law is only implemented because islam demands it. The whole point of this thread is that Sunni Man seems to think that we Americans should also live under sharia. Understand that islam does not allow for secular government.

 

[Intense]

Excuses, Excuses, Excuses............

Logical4u

You just hate like heck to admit that I am right.

But that's okay cause we both know I am.

You are looking at it upside down Sunni. There are areas where Sharia is compliant with US Law, not the other way around. Sharia is compliant in certain areas with Judea-Christian Teachings and values because of a shared common heritage.

 

[logical4u]

Yet the ONLY places you find this is under "islamic law". If islam treats women with dignity, wouldn't laws like this be eliminated?

What’s the dissonance between Judeo-Christian tenets and how people are actually treated in the West? What social ills in the US do we blame on Christianity? And do we hold religious leaders accountable for failed or oppressive government practices?

The failure to protect women from abuse in such countries is the failure of the secular governments of those countries because they don’t accept the principle of the rule of law and the exclusion of religion from governance; that’s not the fault of Islam.

1. islam is not just a religion. It is a system of control, including governence.
2. the social ills in the west are as a "direct" result of liberals and "intellectual elites" rejecting the proven societies of Christians and embracing all things: base.
3. Christianity is not the "required" religion (or you and your family become targets of bullying tacticts the government ignores) of citizens in this country.
4. "Those" govenments are NOT secular (this is a propoganda talking point of those that would oppress all those not believing as they do).
5. If the 'rule of law' is not enforced, equally, why would anyone follow it?
6. Are you really claiming 'islam' is the victim? I don't believe any other religion on the face of the earth has so many abusers that belong to 'one' faith. At what point do you open your eyes and see that not all those that follow islam are committing evil acts, but a HUGE percentage of those that do are islamists?

Go to the ME, and proclaim your love for all things islam, and see how you are received.

 

[Sunni Man]

Go to the ME, and proclaim your love for all things islam, and see how you are received.

You would be welcomed and treated with the utmost courtesy and respect.

 

[logical4u]

Go to the ME, and proclaim your love for all things islam, and see how you are received.

You would be welcomed and treated with the utmost courtesy and respect.

That isn't what Malcolm X said.