Objecting to jihad, will liberals ever?

[theDoctorisIn]

If the Constitution does not conflict with Sharia and the Hassid he will be enforcing his dicatates on what you wear with the death penalty. Whatever you think about Christian fundamentalists, none of them are using violence to make people dress like the Amish, even the Amish.

That's where you lose me. I don't believe that Rauf's plan is to force Americans to live under Sharia law, I believe his statements are more for allowing American Muslims to live under Sharia law if they choose.

You're welcome to believe the Islamic conspiracy to take over the world if you like, I don't.

Again you cannot have dual legal system. We have ONE law.

If muslims what to live under shira law, go home

So I guess we should kick out the Beth Din courts too, right?

Cause we've had those here in NY for quite a while now.

ETA: I don't think you understand what these Sharia courts are. They're not a separate legal system. They are a voluntary arbitration for civil issues. They have nothing to do with Criminal law.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Rauf has claimed that Sharia law DOES NOT CONFLICT with the Constitution - not that he wants to change the Constitution to fit Sharia law. There's a pretty big difference right there.

Really?

What Muslims want is to ensure that their secular laws are not in conflict with the Quran or the Hadith, the sayings of Muhammad.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf: What Shariah Law Is All About

What he is saying is he wants to be sure that the Constitution, and other secular laws, do not conflict with Sharia law. Sharia law permits a man to have up to four wives, our secular laws do not. I know how you think that conflict should be resolved, but how does he think it should.

The secular law and the Constitution conflict with Sharia law,, and he knows it, and wants to change them. Do you still insist that he is actually saying there is no conflict, and he does not want a theocracy?

 

[ConHog]

HEEHEEHEE I see that once again libbies have changed the argument. It went from "No he doesn't want to bring Shari law to the US " to "He only wants Muslims to be subject to it " to "Well what's so bad about Sharia law anyway?"

 

[syrenn]

No, it's not.

Read about the Sharia courts in England. They're used to broker deals, settle contract disputes and civil issues. They do NOT rule on Criminal cases.

And you don't see anything wrong with a dual legal system?

Get a clue if it happened in England where shira law can infiltrate trust me it WILL happen here.

It didn't happen. The fear mongering was false. England is not entirely subject to Sharia law. That's my point.

It's religious arbitration. It happens in the US every day as well.

No but muslims ARE. That is a dual legal system.

Lets take divorce for example. Shira law does not recognize a legal muslim divorce in England. It must go through shira courts to be recognized by muslims countries.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Rauf has claimed that Sharia law DOES NOT CONFLICT with the Constitution - not that he wants to change the Constitution to fit Sharia law. There's a pretty big difference right there.

Really?

What Muslims want is to ensure that their secular laws are not in conflict with the Quran or the Hadith, the sayings of Muhammad.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf: What Shariah Law Is All About

What he is saying is he wants to be sure that the Constitution, and other secular laws, do not conflict with Sharia law. Sharia law permits a man to have up to four wives, our secular laws do not. I know how you think that conflict should be resolved, but how does he think it should.

The secular law and the Constitution conflict with Sharia law,, and he knows it, and wants to change them. Do you still insist that he is actually saying there is no conflict, and he does not want a theocracy?

I'll quote from your link.

Rather than fear Shariah law, we should understand what it actually is. Then we can encourage Muslim countries to make the changes that achieve the essence of fairness and justice that are at the root of Islam.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Most of what I've posted in this thread is responding to Mr. Fitnah, who does believe that there is no such thing as moderate Muslims. I've responded to you when you've posted to me.

I think that the Wahhabi have the megaphone because they're the ones that get Media coverage, not because they're a majority. I think the vast majority, including our friend Rauf, are peaceful, law abiding citizens who should be able to worship who or what they want.

I can accept that.

Unfortunately, those moderate Muslims are not as moderate as you think, including your friend Rauf. Take a closer look at what he is saying to Muslims, not just what he says when the press is around, like what I quoted in my last post.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Rauf has claimed that Sharia law DOES NOT CONFLICT with the Constitution - not that he wants to change the Constitution to fit Sharia law. There's a pretty big difference right there.

Just answer the question.
Do you believe him ?

 

[ConHog]

Most of what I've posted in this thread is responding to Mr. Fitnah, who does believe that there is no such thing as moderate Muslims. I've responded to you when you've posted to me.

I think that the Wahhabi have the megaphone because they're the ones that get Media coverage, not because they're a majority. I think the vast majority, including our friend Rauf, are peaceful, law abiding citizens who should be able to worship who or what they want.

I can accept that.

Unfortunately, those moderate Muslims are not as moderate as you think, including your friend Rauf. Take a closer look at what he is saying to Muslims, not just what he says when the press is around, like what I quoted in my last post.

Expounding on that, try to get a hold of a copy of his book as it was released in Europe, slightly different.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'll quote from your link.

Rather than fear Shariah law, we should understand what it actually is. Then we can encourage Muslim countries to make the changes that achieve the essence of fairness and justice that are at the root of Islam.

You are tying yourself into one of those knots I mentioned earlier.

If a Christian said the exact same thing you would believe that they are attempting to set up a theocracy, no matter how much they prettified it up. I would even support you in arguing against them and their goals.

Why do you apply a different standard to a Muslim?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I'll quote from your link.

Rather than fear Shariah law, we should understand what it actually is. Then we can encourage Muslim countries to make the changes that achieve the essence of fairness and justice that are at the root of Islam.

You are tying yourself into one of those knots I mentioned earlier.

If a Christian said the exact same thing you would believe that they are attempting to set up a theocracy, no matter how much they prettified it up. I would even support you in arguing against them and their goals.

Why do you apply a different standard to a Muslim?

How do you know what I would say if a Christian said anything?

Christians already claim that this country's legal system is based on Judeo-Christian laws. I don't really care, as long as they don't try to force their laws on me.

The minute that Rauf starts attempting to force me to follow Sharia law, then we'll have a problem.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Rauf has claimed that Sharia law DOES NOT CONFLICT with the Constitution - not that he wants to change the Constitution to fit Sharia law. There's a pretty big difference right there.

Just answer the question.
Do you believe him ?

Yes. Now, you just answer the question. Why don't you?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Just as a note to everyone in this thread, I know Rauf personally. He's an acquaintance of mine.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

How do you know what I would say if a Christian said anything?

Christians already claim that this country's legal system is based on Judeo-Christian laws. I don't really care, as long as they don't try to force their laws on me.

The minute that Rauf starts attempting to force me to follow Sharia law, then we'll have a problem.

Point taken.

Like you, I have responded to so many idiots I sometimes confuse the more sensible people with them. That makes me flat out wrong this time.

That does not mean that I will allow Rauf to say that the Constitution should not conflict with Sharia law without voicing my opinion that Sharia law needs to conform to the Constitution, not the other way around. All religions have to conform to the Constitution because it is what our freedom is founded on, not some concept of Judeo-Christian-Islamic law.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Islam dogma in everything liberals claim to hate about Christians.
...the NT which over rules the OT....

...

When will you liberals fight against Islam ?

I thought liberals were too busy joining up in the military to fight terrorism.

If the NT over rules the OT, then the majority of Christians did not get the memo.

Can you have GOD or one of his ass-istants resend the memo?

 

[syrenn]

So I guess we should kick out the Beth Din courts too, right?

Cause we've had those here in NY for quite a while now.

ETA: I don't think you understand what these Sharia courts are. They're not a separate legal system. They are a voluntary arbitration for civil issues. They have nothing to do with Criminal law.

Yes Beth Din need to go as well. I am opposed to any religious law.

I dont think you understand what shaira courts are either. They do impact criminal cases and civil cases.

Mr Siddiqi said that in a recent inheritance dispute handled by the court in Nuneaton, the estate of a Midlands man was divided between three daughters and two sons.

The judges on the panel gave the sons twice as much as the daughters, in accordance with sharia. Had the family gone to a normal British court, the daughters would have got equal amounts.

n the six cases of domestic violence, Mr Siddiqi said the judges ordered the husbands to take anger management classes and mentoring from community elders. There was no further punishment.

In each case, the women subsequently withdrew the complaints they had lodged with the police and the police stopped their investigations.

Sharia law courts operating in Britain - Telegraph

The point being if these cases had been heard under the ONE rule of law the outcomes would have been very different.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

So you think that America will be tricked into becoming a Muslim theocracy?

It could very well happen, as long as we listen to the platitudes of false and designing men and do not question they're motives .

"The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil Constitution, are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors: they purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood, and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an ever lasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men."

Samuel Adams

How would this dytopian fantasy of yours happen?

Rauf has claimed that Sharia law DOES NOT CONFLICT with the Constitution - not that he wants to change the Constitution to fit Sharia law. There's a pretty big difference right there.

Just answer the question.
Do you believe him ?

Yes. Now, you just answer the question. Why don't you?

We get there by populating offices with policy makers and opinion shapers as feeble minded and gullible as you , people who have little or no knowledge of Taqqiya dhimmitude jihad or Islamic deception.
The Constitution is a set of handcuff on government

Sharia is handcuffs on liberty, freedom , free speech ,free association Sharia is religious bigotry totalitarian oppression .

Andrew Bostom is a friend of mine.I have spoken to him on the phone
http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2009/03/11/geert-wilders-and-totalitarian-islam/

Snip

I have nothing against the people. I don’t hate Muslims. But Islam is a totalitarian ideology. It rules every aspect of life – economics, family law, whatever. It has religious symbols, it has a God, it has a book – but it’s not a religion. It can be compared with totalitarian ideologies like Communism or fascism. There is no country where Islam is dominant where you have a real democracy, a real separation between church and state. Islam is totally contrary to our values

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

...
the NT which over rules the OT.

...

I wonder if this guy is on to something?

The Continuity of Old and New Testaments Significance and Importance of the Old Testament

I mentioned earlier that some people unfortunately reject the Old Testament now. The outstanding example in history of rejecting the Old Testament is Marcion who was born in the latter half of the first century AD. He rejected the Old Testament claiming that the God of the Old Testament who was just could not be the same as the Father of Jesus who was loving. He rejected the Twelve Apostles and accepted only Paul as an apostle. He accepted as his Bible only one Gospel, Luke, and the letters of Paul. Is this not ironic that the most famous doubter of the Old Testament also rejected a large part of the New Testament along with it? Although heretical, his followers, called Marcionites, nearly outnumbered faithful Christians during the 160’s and 170’s.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Rauf has claimed that Sharia law DOES NOT CONFLICT with the Constitution - not that he wants to change the Constitution to fit Sharia law. There's a pretty big difference right there.

Just answer the question.
Do you believe him ?

Yes. Now, you just answer the question. Why don't you?

Taliban was a valid Shar'ee government. The methods adopted by the Taliban were in accordance to the Shari'ah.
Ask Imam :: Fatwa

Islamic Politics
Title
Your views on the actions of talibans.

Question
Was it wrong of the talibans to destroy the buddha's statues? Islam teaches tolerance and I don't see how this action on theirs can be justafied. What are you views on this?


Ask Imam :: Fatwa

a) At present, there is no Islamic government in Afghanistan, hence, we
cannot term it as an Islamic state. We make Du'aa that the Taliban will soon
return to power.
b) We share your concern. These so called Muslims have sold their Islam for
a miserable price of this world.
c) Ask the Saudi themselves. We share your sentiments.

and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best

Moulana Imraan Vawda
FATWA DEPT.

CHECKED AND APPROVED: Mufti Ebrahim Desai

Ask Imam :: Fatwa

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

I guess the Dr is out.

 

[PixieStix]

Interesting...How close to jihad do you think radical evangelical Christians are whose mission it is to make the US a theocracy? They're a much bigger threat to our way of life than is anybody else, including Islamic terrorists.

BOTH are threats. Any theocracy is a threat to our American way of life. And at this time, the Far Right Christian Theocracy proponents are much more numerous and have more political clout than do the Far Right Muslim Theocracy proponents. I fear them more...but I hate them both.

I do not know any Christians personally, that want our country to be a theocracy. Islam's doctrine demands it

Our way of life as you say is absolutely Christian based. Our forefathers came here to escape religious persecution, so that they could worship the way they wanted. And so that you and I could choose the way we wanted to worship, or not. Our laws are based on Christianity.
You know the ones about murder and stealing and such