Just your average day of "peaceful Islam"...

[Coyote]

Again, you still can't or won't answer a straightforward question. How long are you going to keep dodging?

Mosaic/OT law is very similar to Sharia and enjoys a small level of support in this country. It's clearly in opposition to American values and freedoms. Should it not be banned?

The term is "Levitical Law."

The number of nations employing Levitical Law as criminal or civil law is zero - this includes Israel. The number of people advocating the adoption of Levitical law is zero.

Again you employ a logical fallacy of a false equivalence in your defense and promotion of radical Islam.

You're a one trick pony in your internet Jihad.

We are talking about the U.S. - have you clued into that yet?

Perhaps you can show me figures on the enormous number of Muslims advocating for Sharia in the US? Perhaps you can show me how they exceed in numbers the Christian Reconstructionists advocating for biblical law in the US (which isn't zero as indicated in the source I quoted)?

Only this time, I suggest you read your sources first before quoting them

 

[Coyote]

More delusional thinking If Shariah law is approved of by about 85% of Muslims abroad, and Muslims in the West come from those same countries, therefore you can assume that a good percentage of them approve of Shariah law as well. It's not like they step on American soil and POOF they suddenly and magically disapprove of Shariah. More wishful thinking.

Did it occur to you that many immigrants come to the US to escape those type of laws? That they value the American way of life?

However, that aside - I'm sure if that is true you can find polls and studies indicating that many Muslims in the US want Shariah law imposed.

Has it occurred to you that many Islamic immigrants come to the U.S. and Europe with the intention of implementing sharia?

And I'm sure you can find some figures to support that claim?

 

[Coyote]

More delusional thinking If Shariah law is approved of by about 85% of Muslims abroad, and Muslims in the West come from those same countries, therefore you can assume that a good percentage of them approve of Shariah law as well. It's not like they step on American soil and POOF they suddenly and magically disapprove of Shariah. More wishful thinking.

Did it occur to you that many immigrants come to the US to escape those type of laws? That they value the American way of life?

However, that aside - I'm sure if that is true you can find polls and studies indicating that many Muslims in the US want Shariah law imposed.

Did it occur to you that most Muslims practice their religion, and as practicing Muslims, you cannot separate Shariah law from Islam?

There is so much that you don't know, or naively assume to be true, I just don't know where to start. It appears you have been fed these false ideas and you are afraid to open your mind to the contrary.

So Roudy, can you please post all those polls and studies that indicate American Muslims want Sharia instituted as the law of the land here?

 

[Katzndogz]

Instead of doing the quote, which I find boring, here's this truly ignorant misstatement:

You did not because American Muslims are not committing such atrocities.

Well, you dolt, what about the Americans involved in the Kenyan mall attack? They don't count?

At least one of the Tsarnaev brothers was an American citizen too. Was he one of the forgotten ones.

Then there is Ramsay Yousef the man who bombed the WTC the first time. Now he was a solid American family man. Then there was the Times Square Bomber, Faisal Shahzad. Don't forget Nidal Hassan the Ft. Hood shooter. He was an American Military man.

If you are saying that American muslims are not committing such atrocities, you are either not thinking, or outright lying.

I was speaking of American Muslims as a whole, not a handful of isolated cases as I already explained. If you're going to blame all Muslims for the atrocities committed, then you better be prepared to demonstrate that such violence is a regular occurrence among them and you can't. That's the point.

They aren't a significant enough percentage of the population in the United States yet. In every country where their numbers have grown, such violence is a regular occurrence. First there are isolated incidents, as the numbers grow so do the incidents. I just cited the most well known. Honor killings would add to that number significantly. Moderate muslim, Muzzammil Syed Hassan, beheaded his wife. Yaser Said killed both his daughters. Shaima Alawadi was beaten to death by her husband and daughter.

Most muslims want to live under sharia law.

Study: Most Muslims want sharia law, split on interpretation - Alarabiya.net English | Front Page

A majority of Muslims around the world want sharia law to be implemented in their countries but are split on how it should be applied, according to a study released Tuesday.

The comprehensive Pew Research Center survey conducted between 2008 and 2012 focused on 38,000 people in 39 countries drawn from a global Muslim community of 2.2 billion people.

A solid majority, notably in Asia, Africa and the Middle East, were in favor of sharia -- traditional Islamic law -- being adopted as “the law of the land” in their countries, it found.

“But I would also note that support for making sharia law does vary,” said Jim Bell, Pew's director of international survey research.

From 12 percent in Turkey, support for sharia as official national law stood at 56 percent in Tunisia, 71 percent in Nigeria, 72 percent in Indonesia, 74 percent in Egypt and 99 percent in Afghanistan.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You did not because American Muslims are not committing such atrocities.

At least, that's what the Tsarnaev brothers told you,

You clearly are doing just that.



That doesn't mean Islam is responsible.

Islam admonishes Muslims to murder or enslave all non-Mulisms.

Yeah, it is evil, and it is responsible for the people who act on the evil it promotes.

Do they? Can you show me evidence of this?

There are a dozen polls in this thread alone that show most Muslims support violence against civilians.

Why should mainstream Muslims answer for acts committed by an extremist group?

Mainstream gun owners are punished for the actions of insane killers, and every single gun owner condemns people like James Holmes, et al. And the left is good with it - actually the left is the group perpetrating the scapegoating of gun owners.

But it is rare that a Muslims will utter even a mild reproach to terrorists, and in those rare occasions, there will be justification as to why the victims actually deserved it, even if the Muslim disapproves of the act.

 

[Kondor3]

Islam is a Neanderthal walking hunched-over in a land of upright Cro Magnons.

 

[Coyote]

More lies. When was the last time you heard Jews calling for the execution of a Jew that converted to another religion, or hanging of gays? Why do you feel it necessary to lie like this for Islam?

We're not talking about fanatics and extremists. We are talking about systems of law. You keep deflecting by trying to bring in Jews and turn this into anti-semitism issue when it's not. What you keep ignoring is that the groups that most support OT/Mosaic law being the law of the land are Christian.

The portions of Mosaic law that Jews use, like the portions of Sharia that used in western countries - involve civil and family law. What you fail to understand is that Sharia is not ONE thing. Kind of like Mosaic law in that sense. The way it's applied in Muslim countries is variable - countries with mixed system of law use Sharia for civil, and secular law for criminal and penal.

In this country there are none calling for the imposition of Sharia. Given that - and given, as you point out there are few calling for the imposition of OT/Mosaic law into our system - I have to ask why?

If the excuse being made for not making all forms of religious law illegal, is that no one in the US is calling for it to be the law of the land, then clearly Sharia and OT/Mosaic law are at the same level. No one is calling for it.

If the excuse for singling out Sharia is that it's abusive and contradictory to American values and freedoms, then so is OT/Mosaic law.

So what is it Roudy?

OT law calls for killing gays you know.

Again the comparison to Mosaic law is false.

How about you ask the Turks, Muslims themselves, why they banned Shariah law, ALL PORTIONS OF IT? Perhaps as Muslims themselves they know what it is? Just saying...

You keep dodging the issue and throwing out red herrings (this time the Turks).

Fact #1: there is no real difference between biblical law and sharia in terms of offenses and punishments.

Fact #2: there IS a minority of Christians calling for the implementation of biblical law (source previously provided)

Fact #3: there appears to be no movement in the American Muslim community to institute Sharia

Fact #4: Despite the fact that biblical law calls for essentially the same crimes and punishments and subordinate status for women....and that there is minority Christian support for it - there is no need to ban it.

Irrational Behavior: We MUST ban Sharia in the US because..because...because....we hate Muslims and they're bad and despite no evidence we know they want to impose Sharia anyway and anyone who wants to apply logic to this is just a Muslim apologist.

If the above were pointed at Jews you would be screaming anti-semite Roudy.

Case closed.

 

[Nox]

Islam admonishes Muslims to murder or enslave all non-Mulisms.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Most American Muslims are average AMERICANS.

Most American Christians are not Tim McVeigh.

And Tim McVeigh wasn't a Christian.

{ In his letter, McVeigh said he was an agnostic but that he would “improvise, adapt and overcome”, if it turned out there was an afterlife. “If I’m going to hell,” he wrote, “I’m gonna have a lot of company.”


McVeigh once said that he believed the universe was guided by natural law, energized by some universal higher power that showed each person right from wrong if they paid attention to what was going on inside them. He had also said, “Science is my religion.” [Michel, Lou and Herbeck, Dan. American Terrorist. pp. 142–143]}

Timothy McVeigh | Start Thinking Right

But lying for Allah is a virtue for a faithful Muslim...

Oh, and the terrorist group he was in, Elohim City - IS linked to Al Qaeda. Terry Nichols attended an Al Qaeda terrorist training camp in the Philippines, which is where he learned to make the OKC bomb.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Does the American value of freedom of religion mean freedom of religion for all?

Just wondering

No.

While Muslims are free to practice and even impose their religion, Christians are prohibited from even common gestures of faith on government ground.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Fact #3: there appears to be no movement in the American Muslim community to institute Sharia..."

That's the way it started in the UK decades ago; waves of immigration, lying-low and keeping a low profile until numbers were on their side in a given district; then the Big Push for Sharia, when the timing was right.

United States law is based upon English law.

If it can happen in the Mother Country, it can happen here.

Muslims in America just haven't built-up their numbers yet, and the time-proximity to 9-11 does not make this stretch of time the most efficacious for their purposes.

But they are, indeed, biding their time, and waiting for an opportunity similar to that exploited by their UK-resident brethren.

The Brits are having mixed results in reversing some of that and stabilizing what remains, and allaying fears and developing safeguards with respect to what remains, but it's an uphill climb and they may have waited too long.

A pattern very similar to what we've seen unfold in France and Germany in recent times.

We're next, if we're not careful.

"...Case closed."

Only if Americans are foolish enough to let down their guard against this medieval throwback called Sharia Law and the belief-system that spawned it.

Au contraire... the case remains wide-open.

 

[Sunni Man]

And Tim McVeigh wasn't a Christian.

Incorrect.

Apparently, Tim McVeigh had a change of heart at the last minute and let a Priest administer 'Last Rights' before he died.

So in essence, he was raised Christian, and decided to leave this world as a Christian..


"Timothy McVeigh received the Last Rites shortly before his death a priest told reporters yesterday. Fr Ron Ashmore, of St. Margaret Mary Church, said McVeigh asked to see Terre Haute prison chaplain Fr Frank Roof in the execution chamber minutes before his death. One of McVeigh's attorneys, Nathan Chambers, said when he arrived at the prison, the warden told him a priest was available if McVeigh wanted the Last Rites. Chambers said, when he asked McVeigh, he replied: "Sure, send him in.'" Fr Ashmore said: "Tim was raised a Catholic. He knows when you ask for that, it's like saying, 'I'm sorry for everything I've done Lord. Please love me."

Timothy McVeigh asked for Last Rites on Independent Catholic News

 

[Coyote]

"...Fact #3: there appears to be no movement in the American Muslim community to institute Sharia..."

That's the way it started in the UK decades ago; waves of immigration, lying-low and keeping a low profile until numbers were on their side in a given district; then the Big Push for Sharia, when the timing was right.

United States law is based upon English law.

If it can happen in the Mother Country, it can happen here.

Muslims in America just haven't built-up their numbers yet, and the time-proximity to 9-11 does not make this stretch of time the most efficacious for their purposes.

But they are, indeed, biding their time, and waiting for an opportunity similar to that exploited by their UK-resident brethren.

The Brits are having mixed results in reversing some of that and stabilizing what remains, and allaying fears and developing safeguards with respect to what remains, but it's an uphill climb and they may have waited too long.

A pattern very similar to what we've seen unfold in France and Germany in recent times.

We're next, if we're not careful.

Cultures vary from nation to nation including the culture, education and economic positions of the immigrant communities and of the native communities' responses to those immigrants which can and have included violent xenophobia and conspiracy-theory rationalizations. We have long had Muslims in our nation and some of the rhetoric surrounding this issue is very reminiscent of the rhetoric thrown at Jews in order to justify some odious attitudes.

"...Case closed."

Only if Americans are foolish enough to let down their guard against this medieval throwback called Sharia Law and the belief-system that spawned it.

Au contraire... the case remains wide-open.

Our system of law and constitution prevent any such thing from happening and frankly, there is no support for it. If the Christian majority in the US have not yet managed to institute biblical law despite attempts then why on earth do you think a Muslim minority could do the same even if it wished to?

 

[Kondor3]

"...Our system of law and constitution prevent any such thing from happening..."

Yes. The UK actually has a State Religion, but even that did not prevent Sharia from gaining traction in districts in which Muslims had become dominant or prevalent.

And, spun the right way, it is possible to circumvent our own System and Constitution to an extent required to make Sharia operative on a so-called 'Voluntary' (Arbitration and Adjudication) basis, but which will be, in truth, anything BUT voluntary for those living in such communities.

This 'separation of church and state' argument fools nobody with any sort of understanding of how laws and systems can be co-opted and subverted and worked-around.

"...and frankly, there is no support for it..."

I don't believe this, but that's only my own skepticism and distrust of this medieval alien belief-system, and nothing based upon verifiable fact.

"...If the Christian majority in the US have not yet managed to institute biblical law despite attempts then why on earth do you think a Muslim minority could do the same even if it wished to?"

The precedent for Voluntary Private Arbitration and Adjudication already exists in this country.

That is the weak spot in the armor through which this country will see the Rise of Sharia in America, as an element in our legal system, if it is going to happen.

It is up to sensible, sane Americans to remain on their guard, a watch spanning decades or generations even, to ensure that such a state of affairs is not allowed to materialize.

Eternal vigilance and all that...

 

[Coyote]

United States law is based upon English law.

If it can happen in the Mother Country, it can happen here.

I presume you are talking about the "Sharia Councils?"

There is quite a bit of misinformation concerning Sharia and English Law.

Sharia and the English legal system: the Government?s view | Law & Religion UK

In reply, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice, Helen Grant, said that there was some confusion over the issue. She stressed that

“… sharia law has no jurisdiction under the law of England and Wales and the courts do not recognise it. There is no parallel court system in this country, and we have no intention of changing the position in any part of England and Wales”.

Sharia was the code of personal religious law governing the conduct of Muslims. There were a number of sharia councils in England and Wales that helped Muslim communities to resolve civil and family disputes by making recommendations by which they hoped the parties would abide; but she said that she wanted to

“… make it absolutely clear that they are not part of the court system in this country and have no means of enforcing their decisions. If any of their decisions or recommendations are illegal or contrary to public policy – including equality policies such as the Equality Act 2010 – or national law, national law will prevail all the time, every time. That is no different from any other council or tribunal, whether or not based on sharia law”.

That said, however, the Government did not prevent individuals from seeking to regulate their lives through religious beliefs or cultural traditions; and provided that activities prescribed by sharia did not contravene the law of England and Wales, there was nothing to prevent people from living by it.

In addition, the use of religious councils or other extra-legal bodies to deal with civil disputes was well established and non-contentious – but such decisions were subject to national law and were not legally enforceable:

“Any member of any community should know that they have the right to refer to an English court at any point, especially in the event that they feel pressured or coerced to resolve an issue in a way with which they feel uncomfortable”.

So what exactly is wrong with this? It's no different than any other religious council such as Roman Catholic or Jewish which seeks to resolve civil disputes within it's community.

 

[Uncensored2008]

We are talking about the U.S. - have you clued into that yet?

You are tossing out dishonest absurdity in an attempt to cover for the crimes of Islam.

Levitical law is irrelevant to any discussion, there are a net total of zero advocates. You are merely tossing out a red herring in a flaccid attempt to distract from the evil that is Islam.

Perhaps you can show me figures on the enormous number of Muslims advocating for Sharia in the US? Perhaps you can show me how they exceed in numbers the Christian Reconstructionists advocating for biblical law in the US (which isn't zero as indicated in the source I quoted)?

Perhaps you can show me anyone - even one - advocating for Levitical law in the USA?

No?

Were you lying for Allah?

Only this time, I suggest you read your sources first before quoting them

 

[Uncensored2008]

But you're good with that....

 

[Kondor3]

"...So what exactly is wrong with this?..."

It is the weak-spot in English (or American) legal armor through which Sharia may gain a foothold as a first step on a long, patient road towards a broader applicability...

 

[Uncensored2008]

And Tim McVeigh wasn't a Christian.

Incorrect.

Apparently, Tim McVeigh had a change of heart at the last minute and let a Priest administer 'Last Rights' before he died.

{In his letter, McVeigh said he was an agnostic but that he would “improvise, adapt and overcome”, if it turned out there was an afterlife. “If I’m going to hell,” he wrote, “I’m gonna have a lot of company.”}

He was hedging his bets.

So in essence, he was raised Christian, and decided to leave this world as a Christian..

Not exactly.

And his terrorist act had nothing to do with Christianity - in fact it have more of a Connection to Islam. While scumbag Timmy never promoted Christ, he had a LOT to say about "ZOG" and other Nazi topics.

"Timothy McVeigh received the Last Rites shortly before his death a priest told reporters yesterday. Fr Ron Ashmore, of St. Margaret Mary Church, said McVeigh asked to see Terre Haute prison chaplain Fr Frank Roof in the execution chamber minutes before his death. One of McVeigh's attorneys, Nathan Chambers, said when he arrived at the prison, the warden told him a priest was available if McVeigh wanted the Last Rites. Chambers said, when he asked McVeigh, he replied: "Sure, send him in.'" Fr Ashmore said: "Tim was raised a Catholic. He knows when you ask for that, it's like saying, 'I'm sorry for everything I've done Lord. Please love me."

Timothy McVeigh asked for Last Rites on Independent Catholic News

I don't believe in god, but if there were a god, he ain't stupid enough to buy into a last second hedge.

 

[Coyote]

"...Our system of law and constitution prevent any such thing from happening..."

Yes. The UK actually has a State Religion, but even that did not prevent Sharia from gaining traction in districts in which Muslims had become dominant or prevalent.

And, spun the right way, it is possible to circumvent our own System and Constitution to an extent required to make Sharia operative on a so-called 'Voluntary' (Arbitration and Adjudication) basis, but which will be, in truth, anything BUT voluntary for those living in such communities.

This 'separation of church and state' argument fools nobody with any sort of understanding of how laws and systems can be co-opted and subverted and worked-around.

"...and frankly, there is no support for it..."

I don't believe this, but that's only my own skepticism and distrust of this medieval alien belief-system, and nothing based upon verifiable fact.

I can't debate or argue with "belief" - I can only try to present facts and deal with people as individuals and Americans.

"...If the Christian majority in the US have not yet managed to institute biblical law despite attempts then why on earth do you think a Muslim minority could do the same even if it wished to?"

The precedent for Voluntary Private Arbitration and Adjudication already exists in this country.

That is the weak spot in the armor through which this country will see the Rise of Sharia in America, as an element in our legal system, if it is going to happen.

Again - if that were so, we would have seen it already in our country's majority religion - God knows they've tried.

It is up to sensible, sane Americans to remain on their guard, a watch spanning decades or generations even, to ensure that such a state of affairs is not allowed to materialize.

Eternal vigilance and all that...

Eternal vigilance...yes.

But I see it as eternal vigilance to safe guard ALL of our rights for ALL of our people - to make sure no group is subjected to second class citizenry, discrimminated against or stripped of their rights because of what they belief. It means basing our decisions on rational thought, not fear and not conspiracy theory. It is those rights and our support of them that makes us what we are as a nation.