All Comments (267)

Hi, i am currently doing year twelve in Australia. And i am Australian and a Christian. Recently i got an assignment in enlish to act as a delagate at a United Nations Youth Form, on social Justice and Human rights. While i was researching religious presecution i found this article. And i am now doing discrimination against Muslims. I think that in our modern society people shouldnt be so sterotypical and bascially stuip. Every group wheater or not a religious group has people in them that dont do the right thing. But does that really mean we must condem the whole group? Are humans really that stuip to think...ow one Muslim did a terroist act, so all Muslims must be terriost. I am only 17 and even i can see the blind stupidity in that way of thinking. Every human has the right to thier basic human rights, so why are we isolating Muslims from thiers? Strip off religion, race, etc...and you will find that we are ALL human beings, so why are we not all being treated equally.I no that my assignment wount have a big impact on this issue, but i hope that i can atleast change the minds of my classmates. I have great respect for you all that are fighting for your religion, just no that there are people out ther, non-muslims that can see whats truly happening and are on your side.

Hi, I am a highschool student, and I was researching for artciles based on the discrimination that Muslims have, because of ONE single incident. I read your "blog" and all I have to say is, you are absolutely right. I would comment more on this topic, but it gets me very upset just thinking about it. I just want to say that what you had to say is very true, and Inshallah your unborn child will not have to go through anything like that; Inshallah none of us will. Salaam:)

flat flat buy apartament

nedvizhimost sdayu tomsk nedvizhimost sdayu tomsk nedvizhimost sdayu tomsk nedvizhimost sdayu tomsk nedvizhimost sdayu tomsk nedvizhimost sdayu tomsk

kvartiry m frunzenskaya kvartira snyat odnokomnatnaya ekaterinburg kvartiry kirovogradskaya 24 prodazha kvartir silikatnaya prodam kvartiru g lyubercy rynok kvartir sankt peterburg arenda kvartir g omsk gp kvartira ru pokupka kvartir g ufa

This post is for Jamil Afkir. My daughter who is 29 years old dated a Moroccan (who was Muslim) for 5 years. Because of her dating him, we have a neighbor who is in a hate group and has terrorized us for 5 years because of who she was with. This neighbor is prejudiced psychopath. My daughter had a baby to Khalid in January of this year and the baby died 4 hours after it was born (Heather was only 6 months pregnant and had been in our car a month before and someone ran into the back of the car, we think on purpose, and lost the baby). Then, we think the neighbor was threatening Khalid because he hadn't taken his citizenship test (he has been here in the U.S. for about 7 years). In July this year, Khalid called her on the phone and said his mother wasn't well and he was going back to Morocco. She hasn't heard from him since and we have reason to believe that he was picked up by the feds per our neighbor who probably called them and said that he was a terrorist and we think he is in prison somewhere and we can't do anything to find out where he is. My daughter has his phone number in Morocco but no one in his home speaks English so she has not tried to call over there. We are trying to find a federal attorney to help us because this neighbor of ours just wanted him out of the road so his son could have my daughter. Khalid was not a terrorist but we are completely in the dark and don't know what has happened to him. If anyone out there of you, Jamil, have any idea how we can find out where he is we would appreciate it.
Thank you. He told my daughter many times that he loved her and this is just not like him to not call her for 5 months.
Thank you.
Jerilyn Capaccione

Every great leader and righteous person had experienced and will experience hatred and violence. We Muslims shall go through that in order to experience what our beloved Prophets (who are also Muslim) have gone through. The seeds of hatred began with satan (Iblees) and shall be here 'till the day of Judgement. It's up to us to put up a good fight...And Allah will be the judge and protector of the righteous! Your son, Eboo, will insha'Allah be one of the Righteous!

Salaams,
I just wanted to say that your article is very well written and you made some great points!

Notification relating the comment of 28 of August 2007. I was definitively not the author of this article. I am not professor in Law, but consultant in genocide studies, and I've never dealed with judicial cases with the city of bloominghton. Additionnally, I've never tempted to live in U.S and my sisters as well.

However, I encourage peole to struggle against discrimination mecanism and promote dignity for everyone.
Regards,
Jamila Afkir

I am a French Muslim woman from Morocco, and have experienced similar reprisals in the United States. My sisters and I were refused entry to Texas because we were considered "suspicious persons". However, this treatment transcends our people and affects others, specifically Jewish people. I am a professor of law and have been studying three parallel cases, two pending in the Southern District of Indiana and one decided in the Indiana Supreme Court:

Leonard's Linen Services v. City of Bloomington
Patinkin v. City of Bloomington
Dvorak v. City of Bloomington

In the first two cases, we learn that a town in Southern Indiana has a history of discriminating against Jewish landowners. In the former case, a demolition permit was denied because it was discovered the buyer was a Jewish person. In the latter, residential occupancy permits were voided when it was discovered that Patinkin is Jewish.
In the third, we learn that the City's discrimination extends to Arab persons. It was learned that the tenants occupying one Peter Dvorak's house were Arab and the City immediately moved to evict these students.

We must fight vigilantly, if it means filing lawsuits in federal court, to achieve redress and
realize the melting pot that America should be. Let's not let this dream die out of apathy.

I am a French Muslim woman from Morocco, and have experienced similar reprisals in the United States. My sisters and I were refused entry to Texas because we were considered "suspicious persons". However, this treatment transcends our people and affects others, specifically Jewish people. I am a professor of law and have been studying three parallel cases, two pending in the Southern District of Indiana and one decided in the Indiana Supreme Court:

Leonard's Linen Services v. City of Bloomington
Patinkin v. City of Bloomington
Dvorak v. City of Bloomington

In the first two cases, we learn that a town in Southern Indiana has a history of discriminating against Jewish landowners. In the former case, a demolition permit was denied because it was discovered the buyer was a Jewish person. In the latter, residential occupancy permits were voided when it was discovered that Patinkin is Jewish.
In the third, we learn that the City's discrimination extends to Arab persons. It was learned that the tenants occupying one Peter Dvorak's house were Arab and the City immediately moved to evict these students.

We must fight vigilantly, if it means filing lawsuits in federal court, to achieve redress and
realize the melting pot that America should be. Let's not let this dream die out of apathy.

glkp mgfsx ilaceorg cxwqymlaj bmaz ncxma brstnxz

glkp mgfsx ilaceorg cxwqymlaj bmaz ncxma brstnxz

"Doesn’t every nation/religion/tradition have a dark side? "

The only dark side of Islam is the people who abuse it. Islam itsself is pure.

dpuhz mydr kbipeog pznsf mvsdwg buvs hezjcfw [URL]http://www.mfuzcjw.cebort.com[/URL] rpgotkay ykrpuis

dpuhz mydr kbipeog pznsf mvsdwg buvs hezjcfw [URL]http://www.mfuzcjw.cebort.com[/URL] rpgotkay ykrpuis

dpuhz mydr kbipeog pznsf mvsdwg buvs hezjcfw [URL]http://www.mfuzcjw.cebort.com[/URL] rpgotkay ykrpuis

uvqbs efoyqx oarxcyljh lehdmyuz vlqy nbgjxoaq bsrhz faiztevym ifmexnk

uvqbs efoyqx oarxcyljh lehdmyuz vlqy nbgjxoaq bsrhz faiztevym ifmexnk

ugyvzw mlqpjh bnudveyi wjkbuypsh iexlzju cubht iglcpr http://www.dovxpsen.fyzdr.com

ugyvzw mlqpjh bnudveyi wjkbuypsh iexlzju cubht iglcpr http://www.dovxpsen.fyzdr.com

culka icyzo ukvxmjtn aquztc fzejphq oatzebs upwnek

culka icyzo ukvxmjtn aquztc fzejphq oatzebs upwnek

I am a highly educated, well published, scientist with Islamic heritage who has lived in US for 20 years. See what happened to me! No one in the media gives a damn about this. It is a shame 50 years after Civil Rights Act to find a company in US to discriminate against Muslims with such audacity!
Here is the story:
------------------------------------

"How can we trust you? You may read Quran and get ideas?"

That is what I was told in one occasion by my manager at Merrill Lynch co. where I worked for more than 3 years!

Merrill Lynch is the largest brokerage firm in America. An investment bank and a fortune 100 company with billions of dollars in profits each year. They have also a long track record of discrimination against African Americans, women, etc. (Google "Merrill Lynch + discrimination" for a long list of law suits and class actions some currently pending). The company employs roughly 50,000 employees out of which only 50 or so have Ph.D degrees. I was one of those with a Ph.D in physics and only one with a middle eastern or Muslim background.

Company is located in down town Manhattan a block away from ground zero. It's always a novelty to find an Iranian or someone of Muslim heritage on Wall Street even though Odds of that are slightly better than finding them on Mars!

If you ever try to get a foot in Wall street you would know that it's a mission impossible specially if you are an Iranian. It's just not meant for us. It's for few elites who have the "goods". You know! Anyhow, They were looking for some highly qualified applicant well versed in a quantitative/scientific discipline and after interviewing a couple of hundreds of candidates they didn't like, I showed up. More than 6 hours of grueling interviews and tens of questions (Math, Finance, Computer Science, Statistics, etc) later I was chosen. People who interviewed me were Ph.D graduates of Columbia, NYU, Cornell & Moscow university etc.

It was not until a year or so later that I demanded equal pay and promotion that discrimination and harassment surged. Beyond the time to time greetings of "terrorist", "risk factor" etc there were discriminatory actions that defies imagination. I was physically isolated from rest of my colleagues. While all my colleagues with PhD degrees (those who interviewed me) were sitting on 5th floor of world financial center I was forced to sit in isolation on a different floor next to IT support personnel and this other fellow who was a programmer with a high school degree! As a matter of fact from the three people who were sitting next to me none was a full time employee as me and none had a degree higher than college. Even though I was doing every bit of duty of a quantitative Analyst/Vice president I was isolated physically not to come in contact with my tiers (New era segregation!).

In one occasion one of my colleagues tried to explain to me this odd arrangement. He said: "You are from a country with a high risk factor. That's why you are not allowed on the trading floor"!

Trading floor is the heart of action (No, no one jumps up and down yelling. It's just that big players and decision makers are there). Here I was, a highly educated, cultured intellectual in this country with a PhD in physics and a Masters in Mathematical finance and I had to sit in some secluded corner because of my nationality and perceived religion. If you think that is shameful and discriminatory wait for the rest of the story.

Once a managing director of the firm shared his wisdom with everyone in the group and said: "If we ever have to fire someone among traders and analysts, who is it going to be? I think traders are so many like Palestinians so there is no problem losing some of them on the other hand analysts are few like Israelis, we can not afford losing them."

That statement is not just discriminatory that is plain hate speech. He has admitted saying that during Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) investigation. EEOC is a government agency who is tasked by enforcing the civil rights act in US.

The harassment and discrimination continued till the point that I started pushing back and demand equal treatment and fair salary. Finally they decided to get rid of me. Despite the fact that the company was on a hiring spree at the time and added a net of few thousands to its work force they got rid of me under pretext of "Reduction in force".

Remember the guy who was sitting next to me with a high school degree? He was chosen over me to stay because they decided he has a better grasp of Financial mathematics than yours truly. No the guy is no math prodigy. He is a temp employee/consultant, an experienced programmer who nonetheless has a hard time even handling high school algebra! After they got rid of me they moved him to 5th floor to sit next to my colleagues who all have Ph.D degrees in math and physics! This is all happening in 21st century America folks! No doubt an opportunity land but for who?! You may find it relevant to know he is of Jewish descend and the manger who discovered his talent happens to be an Israeli national! OOPS!The statements I quoted above belong to other managers not him! Hum...!

After my lay off I filed a complaint with EEOC and they found Merrill Lynch guilty of discrimination against me. EEOC letter signed by the New York City director reads:

"Based on the analysis (of evidence), I have found that respondent subjected charging party to discrimination based on his race and religion and retaliated against him." (Part of the EEOC letter is attached I have eliminated the identities for legal concerns).

EEOC usually rejects 95% of discrimination claims as without merit. They also file a law suit on behalf of the plaintiff only in less than 1% of the cases. Despite the clear statement by EEOC as to blatant and vicious nature of this discrimination eight months ago I am still waiting for them to take the next step and file a law suit in federal court!

To call this discrimination is a misuse of English language. This is a hate crime and a downright attempt to eliminate elite elements of a race and religion and replace them by those who have racial, political and religious affinity with them. It is the people at these positions who are going to command influence and power in the society and by eliminating the elite of one race those who perpetrate these acts consciously and methodically intend to foster an environment that guarantees their domination for generations to come.

It would be a colossal mistake to treat this as an isolated case of unintentional lapse in judgment. This case has all the hallmarks of a concerted effort to systematically insure the future of one race at the expense of another.

Helloooo..where is everyone these days...hope we are not running out of gas here..haha..keep this thing going..

Salaams Victoria..It`s good you brought that. Who is complaining that your "version" of Islam is a watered down western "version"?Are they saying this because you come from a Western background?
In fact, you put it in the best way, the way a Non-Muslim would understand.
There is no such thing as a "real" muslim.We are all equal.Born muslims and REVERTS..Note I use REVERT.
See the other thing with our religion is that it comprises people from all walks of life..different races, different cultures, etc..People must realize that muslims from different parts of the world are very different people..We are not all the same..But what unites us is ISLAM. I went for Hajj in 2001, and you will not believe the people you see there. You will see all shades of skin color there.
I think also a common mistake is for people to associate certain negative aspects of some cutures with Islam.
I have a lot of Christian friends and we are very open minded and have regular discussions about our faiths. I have a lot of respect for ALL religions.My religion is VERY important to me and I get very offended when people insult ISLAM or the prophet (PBUH).
I think this just hatred.I don`t mind someone criticizing any aspect of Islam, because you are ignorant. in which case I will explain to you and if I am unable to do that, refer you to someone like Victoria..

wa alaikum a salaam imran-

i watched relion and ethics weekly yesterday and saw an interview with the panelist eboo patel.

i became muslim in 1999 and admit that i thought muslims were called that because they wore muslin cloth!!!!

i wholeheartedly invite you to post on current questions in the muslim panelits posts, as they degenerate quickly, and one of the common complaints i get is that my "version" of islam is a watered down western "version" and that 'real' muslims would reject it.

that why i came to this site too- to share and dialogue-

i respond often because otherwise the posts would be left to the haters, and there may be that one person out there who believes what they say,

the funny thing is- i encounter in my own community the same restrictive mentality- i sometimes play the devils advocate

peace!

Salaams Victoria, well it`s just so nice to see someone putting so much effort into trying to explain our religion, I know it takes a lot of time, patience and effort.So yeah, give praise where it is due.
People must understand that before 9/11, very few in the west knew about Islam. That`s why I think there is all this ignorance and hatred.Also the ignorance is not only about Islam, but also about other cultures, traditions, etc. It`s ironic that the onus is put on the muslims to explain and teach their religion.
It`s just sad that people come here with the sole intention to insult and offend.
I thought the whole idea of this site was for people to come together and find something common in all of us.
Anyways, Keep it up Victoria..

Peace

wa alaikum a salaam imran- well that is a shock-
its rare i get praise indeed (that was praise right? im so unused to it i may be mistaken)

peace

Salaams Victoria
Let me just say that you are just amazing!! I came across this blog by chance on a saturday night when i had nothing to do.I spent a good few hours trying to read all the posts and still didn`t go through all of them. I see myself as a very liberal, moderate Muslim, and I was shocked how much ignorance and hatred there is for Islam and Muslims.It is actually frightening.Let me just say that today It`s Islam because of the Geo-political landscape, who knows what the target is going to be tomorrow?? Racism, hatred and bigotry have no limits...And yes you are right, I`m an Indian guy and I love blonde, blue eyed ladies..haha

you are creating a false dichotomy with that analogy, as the two issues have a very different value.
the impact on a teenagers life (most likely the parents) of paying higher rates for the PRIVILEGE of driving cannot be compared to not getting a job, losing opportunities, being spat upon, or even imprisoned (as has happened to many)

while freedom from discrimination is not a privilege, it is a right.

so no, high insurance rates for teenagers is not discrimination, as it is at the discretion of the companies to set their rates accoeding to their own criteria.

while discrimination against people based on religion robs them of their rights.

I wonder how we look at teenage insurance rates. Just because a few kids had accidents and drove recklessly does that mean that insurance rates for all teenagers should be high? Is that discrimination?

btw deb- i most certainly did not mess up maudoodi and qutb-

i am aware of the life stories of both-
there was no denunciation of the son of qutb nor ws there racial killing in kashmir because of qutb- they are different people with different backgrounds-

qutb was imprisoned for political reasons- not for inciting people to hate-

what are you talking about deb- manu was the first lawgiver-
to reject the laws of manu is to reject hinduism-

polygamy isnt the issue at all and you know it-

you are so sneaky deb-

manus laws were not thrown out 2000 years ago-

it is a part of the religion not an obscurantist side issue-

where you got this polygamy nonsense is anyones guess- youre i suspect just making that up completely to tie in with islam-

the practices are in practice today- and have been accepted in indian society- and only recently (not 1948) have started to be outlawed-

youre full of nonsense deb

Victoria wrote:

"i have a more than passing knowledge of hinduism, but you dont see me elaborating on manus 4 laws and subsequent proscriptions for the treatment of women do you?"

Good, Vicky, good ! You are picking up ! Way to go girl !

But, you know what ? You are making a sorry creature of yourself. These are the reasons:

1. Manusmriti is indeed Manu's code - where the most racist and casteist views of society are indeed found, and makes anyone puke with shame and hatred. But, Manu's laws are NOT the Hindu religion (way of worship) in any way. They refer to a Hindu society that is ridden with all the evils of caste and sexual discrimination against women and lower birth people. It is not religion, but a society that Manu is referring to. It is not any immutable word of God (like in the Quran) and cannot be used to define worship.

2. Hindu society has been inherently secular and most progressive compared to Islam. About 2200 years ago during the Gupta empire the kings, who ruled most of the Northern India, rejected the laws of Manu in their governance. So, it was that early that Manu's laws were not used.

When India became independent in 1947, the secular Govt. of India (Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru) passed a Hindu marriage act (as a part of the Hindu Personal law) where it constitutionally rejected the code of Manu and made polygamy by Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas (the three upper castes) a felony and prosecutable by law. No Hindu rose to claim something like Jihad against this "interference" into their personal lives.

What this shows is that Hindus are far more progressive and secular. They have the courage to reject the obscurantist something that existed since moon was turning into green cheese.

Contrast this to Islam. It is a primitive and barbaric, illiberal society which thrives by fanatical religious discrimination of women and the minority. The Islamic society (ulema) has not been able to come up with any methods to reform itself. It only thrives by instilling the fear of rape, pillage, loot, arson and murder. (Read the newsitems from Pakistan at the site http://www.dawn.com and you shall see what I mean.)

I agree with Mr. Patel that people of a 'darker hue' are treated as 3/5 of a person in this country. I think people largely from middle America (where demographics have historically been W.A.S.P.-dominated, so therefore exposure to diversity has been minimal) are the biggest perpetrators of this (I was born in the Midwest myself).

My impression is that white Americans think they are somehow entitled to citizenship in this country more than 'brown' or 'black' Americans, regardless of whether or not the latter groups were born here (not that I think natural-born status should be a deciding factor). It doesn't matter, they are perceived as 'different' and so therefore should seemingly feel lucky to even be allowed to live here. I'm white, so I would never imply that I know what it's like to walk in the shoes of minorities, but in my observation this mindset runs rampant in this country. People think they 'aren't racist' because they have lunch with a black colleague now and then. Or media portrayals of Muslims are meant to be enlightened because they are educated, clean-cut and likeable terrorists, rather than surly knife-wielding maniacs. I think this is considered improvement, which shows how vast the problem is.

Because of deep ignorance and intolerance in this country, negative sentiment towards Muslims here is deemed 'understandable' by many post-9/11. Presumably it isn't because people have considered thoughtfully their feelings towards Muslims and came to a logical conclusion that disliking them or being uncomfortable with their presence is legitimate. No, I think the feelings were already deep-seeded and 9/11 only provided ammunition and weak justification for intolerance towards Muslims. Why? Because again I think alot of white (and maybe other races as well, I'm not sure) Americans are very uncomfortable with anything 'different' and, to their perception, 'foreign'. Isn't it interesting how quickly so many, who consider themselves enlightened and certainly not racist, will utter something along the lines of "well if they don't like it, they can go home!" as if the U.S. is, for some reason, not their home. They could be born here, family here for generations, U.S.-passport carrying, tax-paying citizens, but if they are a 'darker hue' as Mr. Patel said, they aren't quite entitled to be considered American.

This mindset is actually very un-American (and un-Christian, not that anyone seems to mind that), if we're to identify with the plaque on the Statue of Liberty and it's sentiment ("Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free..."). As if we're a welcoming place for all! Perhaps it should read 'Give me your money, your educated, English-speaking, European-looking youth or bugger off.'

well, alot of people like alot of things-
is it a reflection on the aryans (noble in sanskrit)that hilter stole the swastika?

i imagine osama had access to a very exclusive education and came across many things he liked and disliked-

creating a false connection just seems like youre casting about for any reason to complain-

i have a more than passing knowledge of hinduism, but you dont see me elaborating on manus 4 laws and subsequent proscriptions for the treatment of women do you?

you know what i mean

see- just because i am aware of some very negative manifestations of your belief system-doesnt make it necessary to to publicly abuse you-

i wont hit you where it hurts- it gos against who i am as a muslim-
its now enough that you know that i know what you know

we will get back on topic

Victoria:

As usual it is apparent on this and other forums, where you simply puke others views, that you become more incredible in your personal attacks when you feel uncomfortable in answering any of the questions posed.

And yes, caste system is indeed elitist. You have, somehow, managed get this right. However elitism in the Hindu caste system does not explain why there is an apparent common thread between yours, Osama, Zawahiri's liking of Sayyid Qutb.

There is more than that meets the eye.

deb is a brahmin so the common rules of civility dont apply to him- if my shadow touched him hed have to go shower and change his clothes-

but we wont discuss the inherent elistism built into the caste system

Deist Ded,

Where are your manners!!!

Victoria:

You have messed up Maudoodi and Qutb. But, that's OK - a characteristic.

The evidences you have cited are really tiny by comparison the follwoing each has even if their Governments had arrested them or Maudoodi's children had disowned him, which you repeatedly cite to show (quite foolishly) that Maudoodi is a discredited scholar. If that were so, the Jammat-i-Islam (founded by Maudoodi in Lahore in 1937) would not have had a substantial following in Pakistan and Bangladesh. It is because of the political power of the Jammat the governments in these countries are surviving. (Pakistan of course is a military dictatorship.)

And, because you like the ideas of Sayyid Qutb who is also a favorite of Osama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri, you three maybe lumped in the same boat.

It is really weird. You are westernized Muslim convert in USA - a country whose Constitution upholds free speech and freedom of almost anything; Osama bin Laden and Zawahiri are opposed to US foreign policies plus the US society/cultural values (free speech in particular and that includes the freedom to criticize Islam). But, by a strange twist of fate (insallah) all three of you have devotion for Sayyid Qutb whose book MILESTONES implies the call for the destruction of US pre-emptively in order to save Islam from its evil influence ! How queer !

Victoria, are you also in cahoots with Al Qaeeda ?

Deb Chatterjee (Ref post 25 March 2007 9:26):

That was an insightful comparison of the Bhagavad Gita with Islam. You did right in pointing out the differences, since religions do have unique aspects about them while they all have the same goal of reaching God.

[BTW my Hindu ancestors were upper caste Brahmins too – Nambudiri/Namboothiri (who practice the most ancient and strictest form of the Vedic religion and are considered princely Hindu Brahmins) from Thrissur, Kerala. Until the age of eight I lived in the same remote village in Thrissur, that my Syro-Malabar Christian ancestors had lived in for over nineteen centuries. Up until my father’s generation almost all my relatives lived and married within a fifty kilometre radius, taking care that the Christians they married were similarly Nambudiri converts, thus maintaining the Hindu social customs despite the conversion! Kerala tradition has it that Apostle Thomas, one of the disciples of Jesus Christ, came to Kerala in 52 AD, along the well established ‘Seidenstrasse’ or ‘Silk (street) Road’ (Kerala being known for trade in spices like pepper) to the small Jewish community that lived in Kerala at the time. The ministry of Apostle Thomas was unique in that he converted not only Jews, but also many Brahmins and other upper caste Hindus in Kerala. The mass conversions of the lower castes by Francis Xavier, the co-founder of the Jesuit order, did not take place until fifteen centuries later. I do not consider it unfortunate at all that my ancestors were Nambudiris. I also consider it extremely fortunate that they converted to Christianity, although it is wonderful to know that Nambudiris practise the oldest religion in the world and as a people they are wonderful and extremely noble.]

Christianity, as you are aware, as a religion preaches NON-violence, so the Bhagavad Gita can be applied to Christianity only in the sense that Mahatama Gandhi did it – primarily as a battle within the individual soul against the forces of evil within oneself and its attachment to objects in the world outside, and of course Bakhti to Jesus, serving Him with detachment and seeking knowledge about Him.

Christianity would make a pathetic state religion because Jesus did not come to mete out justice but to show love and mercy. He said “If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.” That would be a poor way to defend the borders of one’s country when foreign forces invade it. If all enemies are to be forgiven as Jesus commands, and as He did while He hung on the cross dying, who would protect the innocent from the criminals? The Sermon on the Mount (Gospel of Matthew, chapters 5-7) could be considered the summary of Jesus’ teaching. In the early days of Christianity, many Christians ended up getting killed for their faith. There is nothing in the life of Jesus or what is written in the New Testament that justifies any kind of violence. My personal complaint has been that it seems to encourage masochism instead by being told to turn the other cheek! Thank God Jesus also implied that religion and the state should remain separate, when He said “Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, give to God what belongs to God,” and that His kingdom was not of this world. In other words Jesus was talking in terms of a spiritual world and a spiritual kingdom. But that is not to say that it would be bad for politicians to be true Christians. On the contrary, the Western civilisation is proof that wonderful things can come out of it.

Although the New Testament written from the time of the birth of Jesus is the main Scripture for Christians, Christianity also shares the Old Testament with the Jews and Muslims, which does have instances of war and violence. The Old Testament is important to the Christians because the prophets predict the coming of the Messiah, the Saviour of the world, who is the equivalent of the Avatar of the Absolute Brahman. Christianity if founded on our belief that Jesus Christ is the Messiah whose coming was predicted by the Prophets of the Old Testament. Jesus who was born a Jew and lived the life of a Jew till the end, teaching in the Synagogues, referred to the passages in the Old Testament that spoke of His coming to prove that He was the Messiah that the Jews had been promised through their Scripture.

Christianity does not believe in reincarnation. Christians believe that we are saved by the redeeming work of Jesus Christ, who although He lived a perfect life was put to death (an offering of innocent blood) as atonement for our sins. Jesus for Christians is the Avatar of God who broke the cycle of birth and death on our behalf through His perfect life and sacrifice, and we are set free from the cycle of birth and death by worshipping Him. Christians are expected to live a good and holy life not in order to become worthy of Heaven but because Jesus commanded His followers to obey his commands as proof of love for Him, and His command was to love everyone, including our enemies. To develop the ability to love everyone including our enemies in the universal way Jesus commanded, the Bhagavad Gita provides extremely valuable advice that definitely adds to the wisdom of the Bible.

Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

i respect qutb greatly- but it takes more than a 'just because i say so' to validate a claim like that deb-

if he was so respected why did the government of pakistan imprison him?

why is he credited with starting a hateful movement that was racist and apartheid and killed people?

why did his own son distance himself from him and denounce him publicly?

id say your analysis of what constitutes world wide acceptance of something is lacking

Victoria:

Majority of the Islamic world respects Maudoodi and Qutb.

You and other westernized Muslim converts are in minority.

maudodi was imprisoned by his own pakistani government and disowned by his children for the hateful venom he spewed in the name of islam-

so i wouldnt exactly consider his opinion as definitive of anyting but a deranged soul
properly disavowed by those he claimed to represent-

werent there also many cases of actual abuses by hindus from his hateful propoganda?

so one opinion from one diseased character out of history doesnt a majority make- or even a valid opinion for anyone-

Victoria:

I regret some of the typos in my last post to you.

Victoria wrote:

"in islam one can only fight in a defensive posture- and then as soon as the aggressor proclaims peace- one is obligated to repsect that and cease fighting"

Theoretical and speculative opinions, as like yours.

Muhammad's bio has quite different incidents that counter such claims. Also, Muslim scholars - who has not been discredited in the greater Muslim world - but perhaps by westernized Muslim converts like you - such Sayyid Qutb and Maulana Maudoodi have satted that for eliminating "kufr" pre-emptive war is absolutely OK.

actually theres also the major difference in that in islam there is no aggresson- but fighting is only proscribed when ones home is aggressed upon- in other words- no "pre-emptive" judgements allowed -

in order to discern what "injustice" is- theres a judgement-

in islam one can only fight in a defensive posture- and then as soon as the aggressor proclaims peace- one is obligated to repsect that and cease fighting

Soja John Thaikattil:

Your remarks on Bhagavad Gita are quite interesting, and though coming from a upper-caste Brahmin family (unfortunately), I have felt that the message there is indeed universal. Muslims would like the core message, because it does not condemn violence when necessary. Many Muslim scholars have interepreted the message as same as "Jihad" (physical warfare). The similarity, in the opinion of Muslim scholars, is that the Supreme Godhead (Lord Krishna) is telling a human (Arjuna) being to pick up arms, to fight injustice. This is EXACTLY what the message of the Quran is. Parallel to this is the message of monotheism as in the Quran and Bible. How strange !

I have read both texts, and did not see how Muslim/Christian scholars would be wrong in such an assertion.

However major differences are:

(1) Bhagavad Gita [18:63] emphasizes on interpretation of the message to suit the situation at hand, and denouncing anything of the "fundamentalist" stripe like Islam. This means, as stated very clearly in the text, that one must accept/reject the message with questioning, analysis followed by one's own self-convictions through contemplation. The course of action that one might subsequently decide should be pursued without any attachment to the fruits/ results of those actions. (Such actions might, on occasion, involve use of violence and/or peace.)

(2) Emphatic assertion of birth and rebirth (karma) - that is the entrapment of the soul in the mortal flesh commensurate with the deeds in earlier lives. By realization of the Absolute Brahman can one break away the cycle of birth and rebirth.

(3) Several paths to realization of the Absolute Brahman - primary ones being Sankhyayoga [detachment, chapter 2], Karmayoga [deed, chapter 3] and Bhaktiyoga [faith, chapter 12]. The existence of suchseveral paths/forms of worship is to be interpreted similar to "all paths lead to Rome".

For that matter the first suicide bombimg was done by the tamil tigers but no one wants to talk about that...

I agree with you totally. I hate doing it myself; the problem arises when certain people attack islam and our blessed prophet for the sake of inuslts and not to start a frank and balanced discussion and dialogue; and they do it from their perceived superiority and the superority of their religion. I feel cornered when they do that and I come out swinging and don't care whom I hurt. After all said and done I feel bad and ashamed for what I said; but sometimes the way I look at it , it's a dirty job and some one got to do it...

it doesnt serve anyone to point fingers of accusation at others- peope arent so inclined to accept deep criticism-

it is well written- but for the purposes of addressing non-muslims- it is too judgemental and condemnatory-

terrorism actually is an irish invention-
the first urban geurilla was michael collins

its well written- but the content is unnecessarily condemnatory

no one in the histroy of the world ever changed their opinion by having their beliefs attacked

i suggest he or she turn their prodigious talents toward a positive representation of islam- rather than more comments about the sins of the 'other'

PM is muslim you guys. He is arguing the absurdity of the western man's arrogance, materialism and hegemony. He is being sarcastic in talking of the western man superiority and his self righteouss morality.

The statement attests to that: "In the final analysis, however, it is the nature of the victim that decides the issues of morality: causing Western deaths is always ungodly and unpardonable; exterminating non-western peoples carries no such moral stigma. Terrorism, in short, is a Muslim invention, and like fanaticism must be applied exclusively to Islam."

I think it is a very well written piece...

Victoria (ref post 23 March 2007 3:06 AM):

First of all let me assure you that I respect the fact that you became a Muslim as a result of your spiritual search, having tried out several religions for yourself. I mentioned that in one of my posts to you as early as December 2006. I deeply respect the fact that you are widely read, have a very sharp intellect and respond with admirable grace to criticism about Islam or Muslims, and have a most remarkable style of communication that stands out in the crowd. I have noticed too that many have expressed their appreciation for all that in the way they respond to you and are keen to keep you engaged in the discussion.

You wrote: “possibly you weren’t aware that I was responding to a statement- that was defaming the Prophet (pbuh) for living as a householder. (ascetic term for people living in the world).”

Of course I was fully aware that you were responding to negative remarks made about Prophet Mohamed (PBUH). The negative remarks, as I understood them, were not about Mohammed (pbuh) having lived like a householder (the Hindu word for a non-Sannyasi), but about him having married several women, including a child, after the death of his first wife, with whom he was in a monogamous relationship for twenty five years. (I personally think that Mohamed’s (pbuh) first marriage to a widow fifteen years older than him, and his life in a monogamous happy relationship with her for twenty five years until her death, speaks a lot in favour of Mohamed’s generosity and capacity to love.) I understand that Muslim scholars have already engaged in lengthy discussions and multiple interpretations about the polygamous aspect of his life. I also understand that eight years after he started to live the life of polygamy, which was four years before his death at the age of sixty two, Mohamed (pbuh) received a message from heaven to the effect that other human beings were not to follow his example of marrying several women, but restrict the number of wives to a maximum of four, but ONLY if the man could love every single one of them equally, and with the consent of every wife before he married the next. An Indian Muslim friend of mine had explained to me long ago that in effect Mohamed (pbuh) was speaking out against polygamy by making a demand that is humanly impossible, i.e. To love four women in exactly the same way, and to get consent from all wives since no woman who loved her husband deeply would ever give honest consent to share her husband with another woman.

Having said that, the purpose of my response to your comments was not to discuss the rights and wrongs of Mohamed’s polygamy – there are enough Muslim scholars sufficiently interested in discussing it. Besides, Jews and Christians also have details written in the Old Testament which requires considerable effort to explain because they defy our common understanding of what is considered highest morality. Luckily prophets are not gods, and none of them asked the people to worship them and gave instructions to worship God, the Creator of the Universe. As a Christian of course I consider Jesus as Son of God, and not a Prophet. As far as Islam goes, I appreciate particularly the spiritual wealth of the Sufi tradition because I was introduced to it in school first in the form of Kabir’s verses.

I have always been a Christian and remain a Christian by conviction, in spite of being open to the spiritual wealth in other religions, just as you became a Muslim because of your conviction after having tried out other religions for yourself.

I felt that you had portrayed Rama, Krishna, Brahma, Shiva, Vishnu, Buddha, Ramakrishna, the monks in spring in a somewhat distorted light, and hence added some additional information in my response, (some of the details being from the Wikipedia). Sure you or anyone else is entitled to interpret the information given in the Wikipedia in anyway they like.

No, I had no idea that there are five different translations of the Ramayana. I had expected many more, considering that the Ramayana is an ancient epic poem written in Sanskrit – a language that does not lend itself to easy translation. But the original Sanskrit or any of the translations one would normally refer to would not have an account of Sita burn, simply because the story would no longer be a love story, and the values and morals that helped shaped the culture of India would have to be rewritten. To Indian understanding, Rama is the model husband, and Sita is the model wife, who remained faithful to her husband in spite of the persistent attempts by Ravana to seduce her. Sita was proved not to have been an opportunistic adulteress by not being burned. If according to you one out of five translators burned Sita, first of all only one out of five burned her. As for the translator using their translating skills to burn Sita, why they may burn anyone they choose and even write their own story.

You wrote, “if you read sarada devi’s writings- you cant help but be touched by the twinge of loneliness she experienced- sometimes i would get quite sad reading her.”

Sharada Devi, the wife of Ramakrishna, to all accounts was happy to assist her husband in anyway to achieve God consciousness, and she achieved it herself. Neither her husband nor his disciples, who treated her like their mother, seem to have noticed the loneliness. How sure are you then that the loneliness you refer to are not your personal interpretations, and has nothing to do with how Sharada Devi herself felt? Our conditioned mind, in its ordinary state, is so limited in its capacity to grasp anything beyond its own experience or understanding you know, so it might be quite presumptuous to conclude that one understands the emotions of someone like Sharada Devi fully, considering she was taught and groomed by Ramakrishna himself and wanted God realisation for herself as much as he did, and lived too full a life to have had much room for loneliness.

You wrote, “a celibate is a spiritually incomplete experience- one has to truly love another human being…to learn how to love humanity. Buddha had his place in his time-but we are ready to be complete and holistic beings now-
there still is something vaguely unsettling about his lack of filial love after he reached enlightenment- his behaviour was undesirable by the standards humans have set today..”
”
A spiritual experience by its very definition is an experience of the spirit and not of the body. Both, God who is spirit, and our God given human spirit, which gives us life but departs the body at the end of our lives, is beyond gender and sexual needs. It is common knowledge that one has deep spiritual experience when one is able to rise above the body consciousness. And of course the spiritual experience must translate into ordinary mind consciousness, or rather the ordinary mind must be transformed by the spiritual experience and that is the most difficult part of the spiritual experience.

By your definition of “complete” spiritual experience however, all the people we normally consider to have had deep spiritual experience, which translated itself into every aspect of their lives, would need to be struck off the list starting with Jesus Christ. Buddha, Mahavir, John the Baptist, the Dalai Lama, all the Hindu and Buddhist monks and sages who were celibate (most of them were), all the Catholic saints, nuns, monks and priests who achieved great good, etc. Agape is the highest form of love, a love that encompasses all. Sexual love is after all restricted to attractive members of the opposite sex, and is primarily self serving and purely hedonistic, unless its expression is limited to loving a single person in a committed relationship. The legitimate human need for a lifelong companion and sexual expression within that relationship notwithstanding, some are able to rise above that need and develop a universal agape love for all beings, a love that is not erotic or sexual. But as you well know such love is rare, because true celibacy is an extremely hard state to achieve. And sure, agape love can be acquired even when is in a committed love relationship with one member of the opposite sex, but sexual love does NOT automatically create or lead to agape love. Sexual love merely satisfies a legitimate human need and helps love and bond with the person if one is committed to the relationship.

The love of Jesus, Buddha, Mother Theresa, Pope John Paul, and a whole host of others comes across as unsettling to you simply because they were filled with agape love and did not miss sexual love and CHOSE to remain celibate? And by your definition none of them were complete and holistic human beings? And by your definition their behaviour is undesirable by the standards humans have set today? May I ask since when human beings are refused the permission to freely choose celibacy, and who sets the standard that a monogamous sexual relationship is compulsory?

You wrote: “Muhammad(pbuh) showed all humans for all times how to be in constant communion with the god- and still live up to all of our adult repsonsibilities- and best of all-live with each other-

Muhammad(pbuh) aught us how to live with a personal god- in a personal world.
i spent decades personally in that lifestyle-
it was enough- there comes a time to test what is learned- a life lived in pursuing personal salvation results in the self being saved- but i tink the point is broader in regards to humanity-“

I do agree that Mohamed (pbuh) did teach a lot of wonderful things as written in the Quran. I think the instruction to pray five times a day, the month of fasting to intensify prayer, to give charity, help the needy etc are great indeed. I agree too that there is more to spiritual life than pursuing personal salvation alone while ignoring the needs of humanity. The Bible hence teaches that faith without works is dead. The message of Jesus is clear about the day of judgement when we will be asked to give an account of our lives to God and what we have done to the least of our human brethren will be counted as being done for Him.

Balance and moderation in everything else except our love for God is considered the ideal path in all religions.

Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

Deb Chatterjee

Thanks for sharing your thoughts – for pointing out the difference between Hinduism and other religions: Hinduism is a ?con-federation of religions, rather than a single religion, and your succinct overview of the Bhagavad-Gita and how its core message would please the Muslims. Although this thread is about discrimination of Muslims in the US, I am sure the effort to find common ground can only enhance mutual respect and understanding. I'm sure there would be others beside Victoria who stand to benefit from the off topic comment.

I was merely responding to Victoria’s list of names of Hindu gods, sages and prophets from the Bible (refer her post addressed to Ross 22 March 2007 10:24 AM). She was drawing the attention of posters, who made derogatory remarks about the fact that Prophet Mohamed (PBUH), who after the death of his first wife (with whom he was in a monogamous relationship for twenty five years), starting at the age of fifty, married several women (including a child) - details that have been discussed in detail and debated about by Muslim scholars themselves - to a list of religious figures whose lives were comparable. In her post to Ross she wrote, “youre reasoning is that living as a holistic human being and an example for other humans- this invalidates somehow the mission of the prophet?” All I did was add some details about the names on her list in a way to correct the somewhat erroneous picture her comments seemed to create.

Aside: As to the Bhagavad Gita itself, next to the Bible, to me it the most important Scripture. In school I had memorised the 18th chapter for a Sanskrit recitation competition (with no interest in the religious significance of it at the time). However when I spent time at the Ashram of Dom Bede Griffiths starting 1984, I learnt to appreciate the spiritual value of the Bhagavad Gita. At the time Fr Bede happened to give daily talks about the Bhagavad Gita in the Ashram, which was to be later published as “River of Compassion – a Christian commentary on the Bhagavad Gita.” In the introduction to his book, Fr Bede writes, “The Bhagavad Gita or Song of God is a spiritual classic, which though it comes from the Hindu tradition, belongs not only to Hindus, but to all the world. It is part of the spiritual inheritance of mankind. In calling this commentary on the Bhagavad Gita a “Christian Reading”, I do not intend to suggest that there was any Christian influence in the composition or that there is anything specifically Christian about it. I only want to show how it can be a practical guide on the spiritual path.” During my religious initiation ceremony (first of two, but unfortunately the second one was not conducted because I could not return to India before Fr Bede passed away on 13 May 1993) Fr Bede conducted on 23 February 1992, he chose verses 61-66 from the 18th chapter of the Bhagavad Gita for me to read, along with other Bible readings. Fr Bede gave me a name chosen from the Bhagavad Gita – Priya, and he said it meant “Beloved of God.”

Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

Victoria:

Get a grip. Pervez Manzoor is right on the issue of "victimhood" psyche that the Muslim population, as a minority in any country, uses as a trump card. (They have given ACLU a lot of business following 9/11.)

It (Muslims crying hoarse over discrimination) has been that way in India, and the West has now finally woken up from its proverbial slumber to see that this virus has spread in their egalitarian societies too.

Eboo Patel has the option of moving back to his home country to give his child a decent safe haven, free of any "religious" discrimination.

there will be no dialogue if there is accusations and finger pointing- turn your attentions to repossessing the truth so that everyone can understand-
you may otherwise give people words to use against muslims- just watch-

possibly youre ratinale might make some sense to you- but for me - it was prayer inparticular that led me to islam.

prayer after years of contemplation and meditation.
i am sorry you feel this way, but they are your own so you are entitiled to them.

but you are wong in your basic assumptions of how muslims view trancendance, god and our own experiences.

i have never felt an especial need to derogate metaphysical experiences of others-

it is not a competition.

so sad

Undoubtedly, for Muslims, the unkindest cut of modernity is its claim to have dispensed with every source of transcendence that Islam holds so dear. God, revelation and the moral law emanating from it, are, accordingly, all ghosts of an infantile and obsolete metaphysics: they are nothing but deceitful and untrustworthy idols of the unfree and the un-enlightened. However, Islam’s suffering form the affliction of modernity is twofold: it is not only the target of the transcendence-negating rationality of Enlightenment, but also the victim of all the passions and phobias of an unforgiving Christianity. How tragic then that for many Muslims today, there are no other mentors but orientalists, missionaries, media pundits, political analysts and other nondescript experts. For who can deny that even a minimum allegiance to the notion of a western political identity leads to the construction of difference that renders Islam as the ultimate other that must not to be taken on its own terms. Thus, for all its achievements and respectability, western ‘science of Islam’ is but an instrument for the propagation of a message the ultimate aim of which is to ensure the western dominance of the world.

Given the ineluctable fact that all systems of knowledge proceed from certain unproven axioms, it is not unfair to express the tenets of Western ‘islamology’, which is the polemical branch par excellence of the supremacist doctrine of the West, as follows: Muslim reality, whatever its abstruseness, intractability and recalcitrance, is always subservient to the theoretical vision of the Western scholar. Western reality may be complex, contingent and impenetrable (but that is to be expected because of richness and sophistication of western history and institutions, not to speak of the profundity and versatility of the Western mind!) Islamic reality by contrast is arid, insipid and predictable..

That Islam is firmly committed to the command of the Transcendent from beyond presents the Western intellect with no insurmountable epistemological problems. The transcendent in the case of Islam needs no other explanation than the historical; the claim of borrowings from the Biblical tradition is more than adequate to account for the Muslim obsession with God and the Hereafter. Similarly, like Muslim faith, Muslim history is an open book. Whatever the cunning of history, the Western scholar is always able to penetrate the smokescreen of Muslim ideology and self-deception. Islam as a historical phenomenon, therefore, is not what Muslims believe it to be. No, it is what Western scholars have shown it to be, because the Western vision is academic, objective and scientific. Islamic vision, by contrast, is mythical and self-aggrandising. (The paradox that the Western vision of Islam is part of its self-image, and hence equally mythical and self-aggrandising, does not bother the self-confident Western scholar!)

Given the erroneous nature of the Muslims’ image of Islam, it is but natural that Muslims cannot ‘represent’ it in scholarly forums; they cannot have the ‘objectivity’ and ‘intellectual perspicacity’ of the Western islamologues who alone are the scientists of things islamic and the true arbiters of islamicity. All authoritative works on Islam, be these encyclopaedias, dictionaries, standard historical accounts or general cultural tracts, cannot therefore be made the springboards of Muslim propaganda: Muslim contribution to these, inasmuch as it is de rigueur within the charade of multi-culturalism, must be restricted to remote areas and modern themes. Nothing touching the formative history of Islam and the sensitive issues of its message and ideals must ever be interpreted by the Muslims themselves; and if they ever succeed in doing it, they must be branded as ‘apologists’.

The grandest delusion of Muslim self-understanding - such is the tacit, or at times not so tacit, ground of Western islamology - is that God spoke to Muhammad (S). Now, everybody knows that God does not exist and hence does not speak, and least of all to a heathen and gentile people like the Arabs. Or, if one insists upon using the theological language, then there can be no denying that the only genuine discourse on God is found in the Biblical tradition. Only the theological genius of the Hebrews, or the philosophical profundity of their successors, the Christian Church, can claim to having engendered and cultivated a universal morality which is the ultimate gift of the theism.

Islam is not a religion in the true sense of the word: it is too this-worldly, sensual, obsessed with power and earthly glory, to qualify as a genuine salvational doctrine. Christian charity and overcoming of the forces of evil, by the paradoxical, nay scandalous, stratagem of surrender and self-sacrifice, is the only true path to individual redemption. That the West has created a civilisation that is far more secular, sensual and power-intoxicated than any other known to man, islamic included, does not, of course, refute the Western claim, or falsify the Christian rhetoric of love. There is no duplicity of morals and power in the Western tradition; what it possesses is a unique tension between the unattainable ideal of self-transcendence and the easily achievable reality of self-worship. Nothing, none of the umpteen genocidal wars against ancient Barbarians, medieval Saracens, modern American Indians, African natives, and countless number of other non-Western tribes, can blemish the peaceful and compassionate image of the Western world-polity.

The West is the source of all the humane ideas of the world. Hence, its military technology, which canonises remote-killing and sanctions the indiscriminate slaughter of non-combatant civilians in the name of collective good, cannot be likened to the terrorist acts of our times. Mass killing in the name of the state is legitimate and justified; sporadic acts of violence in the name of religion (read: Islam) are illicit and immoral. In the final analysis, however, it is the nature of the victim that decides the issues of morality: causing Western deaths is always ungodly and unpardonable; exterminating non-western peoples carries no such moral stigma. Terrorism, in short, is a Muslim invention, and like fanaticism must be applied exclusively to Islam.

Humanity, in the hegemonic perception of the West, is an abstraction devoid of political content. It exists in the moral universe of man but has nothing to do with the power-structures of states and nations. Humanitarian visions of a Just Global Order are therefore vehicles of political blackmail by the powerless and the marginalized. Human Rights, on the other hand, embody true norms of political morality and civilised behaviour. Besides, the powerful and the privileged never utilise them as instruments of Realpolitik and self-promotion. Thus, if in order to safeguard an individual’s political rights, wars need be waged, nations need be destroyed, humanity need be made to suffer, so be it. The individual is sovereign over the state - except of course, if the state happens to be Western and the individual a non-Westerner. That the legal provision of equality before law within the same state did not prevent the extinction of Jews in Nazi Germany and massacre of Muslims in Bosnia, is besides the point. For a Jew, or a Muslim, as citizen may be equal to his German or Yugoslavian fellow-citizen, but Judaism as a community, and Muslims as an umma, cannot be given the same status vis-à-vis the Christian West.

Those who do not accept these tenets of the hegemonic Western worldview and reject the canons of its global order are bound to disappear from history. For the goal and meaning of universal history is the self-realisation of the free and rational man - the Western man par excellence.

Given the nature of this indoctrination, which denounces every expression of Muslim identity as a conspiracy against humanity, which degrades every aspiration of Muslim morality as a return to medieval bondage, which reduces the Islamic Project to a barbaric obssession with the subjugation of women, which disfigures the soul of Islam for the sake of propagating the myth of Western superiority, isn’t it high time that Muslims start resisting the cultural and intellectual imperialism of the West. The battle for the recovery of Muslim self-image is a battle for the repossession of truth.
Parvez Manzoor

youre most welcome to elaborate if you want to deb- this was an interesting an enlightening post

Soja John Thaikattil

I don't get into the more deeper aspects of Hindu philosophy. First, I would submit:

(a) Hinduism is not an (organized) religion like in the Abrahamic sense.

(b) Sree Bhagavad Gita, which is considered revealed on a battleground, by Lord Krihsna himself preaches and strictly advocates monotheism. Its core message would please the Muslims because of its insistence "There is no God, but God, and all other forms of worship false because they do not lead to ultimate salvation". Here ultimate salvation means breaking away from the cycle of birth and rebirth. This happens when one realizes the Absolute Brahman within him/her.

In that text it is stated that celibacy is, as you have corectly opined, NOT mandatory for realizing Absolute Brahman. It is ONE of the ways to achieve that state.

The Sree Bhagavad Gita rejects any past Do's and dont's as used be the case in the Vedic era that emphasized on rituals to please the various gods and goddesses. But Sree Bhagavad Gita breaks away from that thought process by stating that all these demigods are actually manifestation of the Almighty God in various forms. Hence Gita suggests that worshipping the One God is the ultimate of worship (chapter 9, 10, 18 in particular).

Faith [Bhaktiyoga, chapter 12] (as a form of submission) is considered one of the easiest ways to achieve ultimate salvation, like Gyanyoga [Knowledge, chapters 2 & 4] and Karmayoga [chapter 3].

Anyway, I don't want to elaborate on this subject, as it does not relate how Muslims are discriminated in USA or the West.

Paula and others - here is substantiation against the rather indelicate claim of "muslims bogus whining"

September 11, 2005

Muslims in America - Four Years After 9/11

by Habib Siddiqui

"The U.S. Congress has yet to name an independent investigative commission similar to the one conducted by the Sept. 11 commission to examine how the Qur’an-abuse occurred in prisons across Guantanamo Bay, Afghanistan and Iraq, and to develop policies to prevent such offensive incidences."

Four years ago America’s sense of invulnerability on its own soil was shattered when two hijacked planes crashed separately into the twin towers of the WTC causing each to collapse. Since that momentous event, 9/11 has become an important anniversary. Not this year though. It was totally overshadowed by the Katrina disaster.

The anniversary also came at a time when President Bush’s approval rating was at an all time low with everything from the war in Iraq to oil price seemingly going in the wrong direction.

My friends and family members, living outside the United States, often ask me about how the aftermath has been for Muslims living in America. Answering the question is not as simple because one’s personal experiences would vary depending on the location one lives in, the job one does, the interaction one maintains both within and outside the Muslim community, etc. While the full dimension of backlash against Muslim Americans may never be known, from the reports I have been able to read and hear, there is no doubt that the last four years have been anything but pleasant for most Muslim Americans. This is because of the alleged involvement of some young Muslims hijackers with the attack on America on that fateful day. As for me, I hardly now perform congregational prayers in Islamic centers and mosques. I also don’t deliver as many lectures on Islam and Muslim issues that I used to do. I know of many Muslims who don’t frequent Islamic centers as often as they used to.

In July 2002, the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) polled 945 Muslims to find how 9/11 has affected them. Forty-eight percent of the respondents said that their lives had changed for the worse since 9/11 while 57% reported experiencing an act of bias or discrimination, ranging from disparaging remarks to a hate crime. [1]

Many new Muslim immigrants have clustered in certain jobs, notably as small business owners, running gas stations, convenience stores, motels, and as cab drivers. This may account for the prevalence of backlash victims among persons with these occupations. Two of the three 9/11-related murders for which charges have been brought were of convenience store workers. The third murdered victim was a gas station owner. The taxi dispatch services in many major cities reported that after 9/11 they had received threatening calls saying that their Muslim and Arab taxi workers would be killed. [2]

According to a 2002 Human Rights Watch (HRW) report “The September 11 Backlash” [3] (against Muslims and Arabs): “Mosques and places of worship perceived to be mosques appeared to be among the most likely places of September 11-related backlash violence. SAALT’s (South Asian American Leaders of Tomorrow) survey of bias incidents reported in major news media found 104 bias incidents against places of worship reported during the first week after September 11. [4] … Although September 11 backlash violence against individual Arabs and Muslims decreased markedly by November 2001, attacks continued against mosques or houses of worship perceived to be Arab or Muslim. On November 19, 2001, four teenagers burned down the Gobind Sadan, a multi-faith worship center in Oswego, New York, because they believed the worshippers were supporters of Osama Bin Laden. On March 25, 2002, a man who stated to police that he hated Muslims crashed his pickup truck into a mosque in Tallahassee, Florida thirty minutes after evening prayers.[5] On June 11, 2002, in Milipitas, California, vandals broke into a mosque under construction, scrawled derogatory remarks such as, "F- Arabs" and damaged the interior of a construction trailer near the mosque.[6] On August 24, 2002, federal authorities announced they had discovered a plan by a doctor in Tampa Bay to bomb and destroy approximately 50 mosques and Islamic cultural centers in south Florida. The doctor's home contained rocket launchers, sniper rifles and twenty live bombs.” [7]

As to job-related discrimination, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) received 488 complaints as of May 2002. Of these, 301 involved persons who were fired from their jobs. A poll of Arab Americans conducted in May 2002 found that 20% had personally experienced job discrimination. [8]

In the pre-9/11 days, e.g., in 2000, the FBI received reports of 28 hate crimes (offenses motivated by race, religion, color, gender, etc.) against Muslims and Arabs in the U.S. In 2001, that number jumped to 481, most of these within weeks after 9/11. (The Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee, however, reported a higher figure; for instance, over 600 9/11-related hate crimes, committed against Arab Americans.)[9] What is important here is to realize that a U.S. Justice Department study found that a whopping 75% of hate crimes go unreported.[10] That means actual hate crimes could be four times the reported numbers.

Hate crimes against Muslim Americans increased by 121% to 1019 incidents in 2003, according to a report released on May 3, 2004 by Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). The report also showed that overall anti-Muslim incidents in the United States increased by almost 70% in 2003.[11]

In the last two years, while the sporadic violence against anyone resembling a Muslim or an Arab has subsided, the level of aggressive disrespect and intolerance of Islam, mistrust of and discrimination against Muslims at workplaces is showing no sign of receding. The root cause may lie elsewhere - in the spiteful and bigoted sermons emanating from the churches, synagogues, temples, radio talk show programs, TV shows (especially Fox and the evangelical ones), and public libraries.

Quoting CAIR, the Human Rights Watch reports that the number of violent acts, discriminatory incidents and cases of harassment against Muslims rose 49% between 2003 and 2004 to 1522. [12]

The other more worrisome matter is: hate crimes against Muslims and Arabs remain disproportionately high compared to their proportion. For example, in Texas Arabs make up only about 0.3% of population, but they are victims in 4% of all hate crimes. About 0.5% percent of Texans are Muslims, but they are victims in 2.8% of the reported hate crimes. [13]

Some notable victims of witch-hunting include Jose Padilla and Capt. Yee.

Jose Padilla, a convert to Islam, was declared an “enemy combatant” (indeed the only American declared as such) by Presidential order and ordered locked away in a military brig in South Carolina — where he has languished since May 2002 in a windowless, 5-by-7-foot cell that is always brightly lit — without an indictment, a trial or access to a lawyer. When a U.S. District Court ruled in early September of this year in favor of President Bush in the case of Jose Padilla — it struck a major blow at the Constitution, upholding actions by the administration that Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens has said have “created a unique and unprecedented threat to the freedom of every American citizen.” [14]

In September of 2003, Capt. James J. Yee, a 1990 graduate of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., another convert to Islam, who served as an Army Islamic chaplain and counseled prisoners at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, naval base, was charged with espionage, aiding the enemy and spying. A year later, all charges against him were dropped. [15]

Few other Muslim members of the Armed forces were similarly harassed on cooked up charges of passing information to terrorists, only to be dropped later. [16]

Most Muslim places of worship are now monitored by the FBI and their informants to unearth Muslim radicalism. However, radical and hate sermons emanating from satellite channels and talk Radio shows, run by fundamentalist and evangelical Christians, are considered quite kosher and are routinely overlooked.

As to the backlash against Muslims in 2005, I provide below some random cases.

The Los Angeles Times in its June 4, 2005 issue reported that a suspicious fire gutted a 1500 square foot mosque in San Barnardino, California. The June 17, 2005 issue of the Washington Post reported that someone left a bag of burned Qur’ans in front of the Islamic Center of Blacksburg, Virginia.

Just three months ago, at the height of controversy over abuse of the Muslim Holy Book by U.S. military guards at the Guantanamo Bay prison, a sign in front of a Baptist church on one of the most traveled highways in the USA (at 2361 U.S. 221 South) read, “The Koran needs to be flushed.” To support the hateful message, its pastor Creighton Lovelace said, “I believe that it is a statement supporting the word of God and that it (the Bible) is above all and that any other religious book that does not teach Christ as savior and lord as the 66 books of the Bible teaches it, is wrong.” [17] He further said that it was the work of God to display the sign and that no one in the church had spoken against it.

The U.S. Congress has yet to name an independent investigative commission similar to the one conducted by the Sept. 11 commission to examine how the Qur’an-abuse occurred in prisons across Guantanamo Bay, Afghanistan and Iraq, and to develop policies to prevent such offensive incidences.

As to witch-hunting, there seems to be no let down against Muslims and their organizations. Almost all of the money exchange and charitable organizations have been shut down, some facing criminal charges of abetting terrorist organizations in the Muslim world. Muslims are afraid to write donation cheques for fear that they may be accused of funneling money to terrorists. Who can deny the influence of Saffron dollars to help poisonous ideologies like Hindutva in India, responsible for so much carnage in the largest democracy on earth? How about funds that are raised by sympathizers of the rogue state Israel, responsible for killing thousands of unarmed Palestinians? But no eyebrows are raised for such fund-raising that kills Muslims overseas.

Just the last week, on Friday morning, September 24, federal agents raided a Muslim campground in Moodus, Connecticut, seizing specimens and seeds from datashak, a plant native to Bangladesh and India. Members of the FBI and U.S. Department of Agriculture said in documents that they also seized 19 computer discs and an assortment of documents from the 18-acre Town Street property, owned by Darul Uloom Shady Brook, Inc. The campground’s caretaker is from Bangladesh, who had cooked meal containing datashak at a recent summer camp, attended by some two dozen Muslim youths.[18]

Soon after the Madrid bombing, Oregon lawyer Brandon Mayfield, a convert to Islam, was arrested in connection with the bombings after being linked by the FBI to a fingerprint found near the scene. After spending two weeks in jail, the FBI acknowledged its mistake and Mayfield was released. He has lately filed a lawsuit in federal court arguing that the federal government targeted him in the wake of the March Madrid train bombings because of his Muslim faith. In his suit, Mayfield challenges the constitutionality of the USA Patriot Act and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and says that the government violated his civil rights by searching his home and office, seizing his family's belongings and holding him in jail. [19]

In December 2003, an Arizona newspaper published a very provocative letter from a Tucson resident that urged fellow Americans to kill Muslims to retaliate for the death of American soldiers in Iraq. It read, “Whenever there is an assassination or another atrocity, we should proceed to the closest mosque and execute five of the first Muslims we encounter.” Two Tucson Muslims filed a lawsuit claiming that the letter constituted an assault and an intentional inflection of emotional distress. Interestingly, in July of this year the state Supreme Court in a 5-0 unanimous decision ruled that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protected the right of the resident and the paper for the provocative letter.

Just imagine the kind of hullabaloo that would have generated if a Muslim had written a similar piece in any Muslim-majority country urging fellow Muslims to kill (just) one (and not five) Christian(s) for every Muslim killed in Iraq and Afghanistan by the Anglo-American forces. No, I am not surprised with the verdict of the Arizona Supreme Court, but genuinely concerned at how murky the distinction between right and wrong is becoming. Remember how the Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld came to protect the right of free speech of General Boykin? It is these kinds of actions, condoning what most Muslims find offensive, that help breed hate crimes against Muslims. Spiteful and bigoted people take such as a license to do their evil acts. No wonder that there is such a mushrooming of hate literature in public libraries!

For every new post-9/11 book about Islam, available today in most public libraries, there are at least three that are written to vilify the faith and its adherents.[20] The world has not seen the preponderance of such hate literatures since the days of Hitler’s Germany. These hate books are used as arsenal in the contest to subjugate, strike down, compel and crush any Arab and Muslim resistance to western dominance.

And what to make of poisonous sermons and bigoted remarks from spiteful evangelical Christian priests like Pat Robertson, Hagee, Graham and other perverted bishops? [21]

While one can find excuses for the demented and depraved Christian pastor and the Tucson citizen, and also for bigoted and racist priests, ‘9/11-overnight-scholars,’ pen-pushing writers and their greedy publishers, how can one justify the remark of an elected member of the U.S. Congress - the Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo (Colorado) - who in July 2005 called for a nuclear attack on Islam’s holiest sites if there were to be another terrorist attack on the USA? [22]

In the aftermath of the London bombing of July 7, the pressure on Muslim American leadership from the various segments of the American society has been so acutely felt that on July 28, ’05, the Fiqh Council of North America had to issue a fatwa denouncing terrorism. Within a week, some 173 organizations, mosques and imams endorsed the fatwa. This is an interesting development given the fact that no other religious groups had been invoked to do such a thing for the alleged crimes committed by their fellow co-religionists. (Note: In terrorist activities, the Tamil Tigers, comprising Hindu rebels from Sri Lanka, are known to have committed more terrorist activities than any other group. I am not aware if the Vatican was ever swayed to condemning the past activities of the IRA. Interestingly, the United States remains the largest contributor to funding for the IRA.)

However, all is not gloom and doom for Muslims. One major step in improving America’s image in the Muslim world has been President Bush’s decision appointing Karen Hughes. She recently attended the 42nd ISNA conference in Chicago. In her brief talk, Ambassador Hughes elucidated the four E’s of her approach: Education, Empowerment, Engagement and Exchanges. She recognized the need to empower American Muslims so that they could become more effective ambassadors for Islam in America and the US in the Muslim World. She suggested that American Muslims and her department should work together to (1) advance a positive vision of hope and opportunity to the Muslim World, (2) isolate and marginalize forces of intolerance and violence, (3) foster a sense of common intent and common purpose and common values.

Ambassador Hughes recognizes that there are American ideologues who are continually preaching hatred against Islam and Muslims. Her success in public diplomacy in achieving the four goals will largely depend on her ability to keep in check the Islamophobic messages that consistently come from evangelical leaders, conservative talk shows and neoconservative columnists.

im listening to a congressman right now stating that muslims all over the world are dedicated to killing americans and freedom-

are you all living in a vacuum?

back on topic

respectfully soja- i lived the life for many years-

possibly you werent aware that i was responding to a staement- that was defaming the Prphet(pbuh) for living as a householder.(aesetic term for peopleliving in the world)

ive read all these and more-over and again as i do- i have my own perspectives that differ fromwikipedias interpertations (did you know there are 5 different translations of the ramayan in english- one has sita burn!)

and my point wasnt really elaborated on.

for instance- if you read sarada devis writings- you cant help but be touched by the twinge of loneliness she experienced- sometimes i would get quite sad reading her-

this in my experience of having lived both is the superiority of islam-

this is exactly why he is the seal and final Prophet, the last word from god as it were-

because it is the completion of the whole human being- a celibate is a spiritually incomplete experience- one has to truly love another human being (as youve stated above) to learn how to love humanity-

buddha had his place in his time-but we are ready to be complete and holistic beings now-
and for all that he still wasnt a human without sexuality- he was married- were not all born princes with the assurance that we can take off and our families will be provided for-
and there still is something vaguely unsettling about his lack of filial love after he reached enlightenment- ( his behavior was undesirable by the standards humans have set today, that is why i used that word-)

any bond forged in this life has to be honored-
Muhammad(pbuh) showed all humans for all times how to be in constant communion with the god- and still live up to all of our adult repsonsibilities- and best of all-live with each other-

Muhammad(pbuh) aught us how to live with a personal god- in a personal world.

i spent decades personally in that lifestyle-
it was enough- there comes a time to test what is learned- a life lived in pursuing personal salvation results in the self being saved- but i tink the point is broader in regards to humanity-

balance and moderation-

Victoria

In your post (addressed to Ross) 22 March 2007 10:24 AM, you wrote:

“Is celibacy is equivalent to closeness to divine experience?

"I was a novitiate and celibate for a long time ross…

"what about krishna and rama? (the married woman used to leave their husbands to follow krishna to the groves where he would manifest himself into many incarnations so he could enjoy them all simultaneously)

"-what about brahma and vishnu and shiva?

-what about ramakrishna? what about abraham and moses and noah?

"gautami had a wife and children that he left to become the buddha- is that responsible desirable behavior?

"have you ever been to a temple of monks in the spring? i have- and i tell you honestly that human nature being what it is- all that frantic energy repressd into prayer is a manic experience- “

Since you made statements relating to Krishna, Rama, Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, Ramakrishna, Gautama Buddha, Abraham, Moses, Noah, monks in spring, although not a Hindu myself , nor having any expertise on the subject, as someone born and raised in India, I wanted to add my thoughts, noticing that no Hindu (? Deb Chatterjee) has responded to your post thus far.

You wrote: “Is celibacy equivalent to closeness to divine experience?”

Having mentioned that you were a Franciscan novice/nun for some years, I thought you would know the goal of adopting celibacy and its role in facilitating divine experience well enough. But since you asked anyway, I venture to add my thoughts from the religious perspective. The tradition of celibacy in Buddhism, Catholicism and Hinduism has a definite purpose – to withdraw the senses, concentrate one’s energies, and focus on the spiritual life/practice and to TRANSFORM the powerful sexual energy into spiritual energy. It is merely a means to an end not an end in itself. So Celibacy IN ITSELF is NOT equivalent to closeness to divine experience. You saw some of the effect of celibacy that goes hand in hand with intense spiritual practice when you wrote: “have you (meaning Ross) ever been to a temple of monks in the spring? i have- and i tell you honestly that human nature being what it is- all that frantic energy repressed into prayer is a manic experience-“ Does the Dalai Lama come across to you as wanting in any kind of development because he has been celibate all his life? I am sure you have known healthy and happy nuns and priests yourself as a Franciscan novice for many years. A real calling to celibacy is rare, as you know from your own life. I’m very happy for you that you made the decision to quit a way of life that you were not called to, and are now happily married. It goes without saying that the path of celibacy is extremely hard to practice, and is not suited to everyone, nor is it mandatory for attaining high levels of spiritual enlightenment. However, if practised right, it remains a valid tool to enhance the spiritual practise one chooses to follow. Even from a strictly energy and time management point of view, real celibacy (which includes the heart, intentions and thought in addition to the body) leaves the senses free to focus on other things. In real life it seems that to many, such celibacy outside one's committed relationship is hard enough to practice. So the single life is not a prerequiste for spiritual progress, and should not be mandated, and it never is.

From the time the Bhagavad-Gita was written (500 – 50 BC), it was recognised that one could live as a householder and still attain God realisation by worshipping God and living a life as described in the Bhagavad-Gita, without withdrawing from the world and living a celibate life. Judaism as you know did not have the tradition of celibacy either.

You wrote: “what about krishna and rama? (the married woman used to leave their husbands to follow krishna to the groves where he would manifest himself into many incarnations so he could enjoy them all simultaneously)
-what about brahma and vishnu and shiva?”

Although Wikipedia should not be considered equivalent to a peer reviewed publication, it does provide some valuable information. So please look it up for further details if you choose. I’m only note a couple of points here.

Brahman, Vishnu, Shiva, Rama and Krishna are all considered gods in Hinduism, not prophets or human beings. Whatever is written about them should hence be interpreted from a mythological/symbolic perspective.

• RAMA and Sita are the protagonists in one of the most famous love stories of all time. Described as being deeply in love, Sita and Rama are theologically understood as avatars of Lakshmi and Vishnu respectively. Rama and his wife Sita are considered the model for Hindu couples. Both loved each other exclusively in a monogamous lifelong relationship. “The epic Ramayana, written between 500-100 BC tells the story. Rāmāyana is not just an ordinary story. It contains the teachings of ancient Hindu sages and presents them through allegory in narrative and the interspersion of the philosophical and the devotional. The characters of Rama, Sita, Lakshmana, Bharata, Hanumān and Rāvana (the villain of the piece) are all fundamental to the cultural consciousness of India.”

• “Rāmachandra, Śrī Rāma was a king of ancient India whose grand story is portrayed in the epic Ramayana, one of the two great epics of India. In Hinduism, he is also considered to be the Seventh Avatara of Vishnu and one of the most important manifestations of God. He is one of the most popular heroes of Hindu mythology and folktales in South and Southeast Asia. Born as the eldest son of Kausalya and Dasaratha, king of Kosala, he is the embodiment of the Supreme Brahman and Dharma. Rama is Maryada Purushottama, literally The Perfect Man. He is the hero of the ancient Hindu epic poem, The Ramayana (from Sanskrit, The Journey of Rama). Rama is the husband of Sita, who is also considered the Avatara of Lakshmi and the embodiment of perfect womanhood. Rama's life and journey is one of perfect adherence of dharma despite harsh tests of life and time.”

• KRISHNA appears in the epic Mahabharata (written between 9th and 5th century BC), and is the main character in the most important Hindu Scripture, the Bhagavad-Gita. The reference to relationships in other writings about Krishna supposedly describe symbolically the drawing of the soul to God in an amorous way and should not interpreted as a human male encouraging married women to leave their husbands in order for him to “enjoy them all simultaneously“ in a physical sense. The Gopis referred to are maidens, not married women.

• “Krishna is a deity famously worshipped throughout the traditions of Hinduism. He is usually depicted as a young cowherd boy playing a flute (based on depictions in the Bhagavata Purana) or a youthful prince giving philosophical direction (as in Bhagavad Gita).”

• “Most commonly within Hinduism, Krishna is worshipped as an avatar of Vishnu, who is considered the Supreme God by the Vaishnava schools. Within Gaudiya Vaishnavism Krishna is worshipped as the source of all other avatars (including Vishnu).”

• “Krishna and the stories associated with him appear across the broad spectrum of Hindu philosophical and theological traditions. Though they sometimes differ in details reflecting the concerns of a particular tradition, some core features are shared by all. These include a divine incarnation, a pastoral childhood and youth, and life as a heroic warrior and teacher.”

• BRAMA (not to be mistaken with the Absolute Brahman) is an unpopular god and not worshipped.

• SHIVA (consort Parvathi) is believed to be a formless, timeless and spaceless Supreme God.

• VISHNU (consort Lakshmi) known as Narayana is the Supreme Being or Ultimate Reality for Vaishnavas and a manifestation of Brahman in the Advaita or Smarta traditions of Hinduism.

Ramakrishna Paramahamsa is the guru of the world famous Vivekanda (BTW both Bengalis like Deb Chatterjee must be). There is nothing to suggest that he was a man of loose morals or had several wives/sexual partners

• “Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, born Gadadhar Chattopadhyay, (February 18, 1836–August 16, 1886) was a Hindu religious teacher and an influential figure in the Bengal Renaissance of the Nineteenth century. His teachings emphasized God-realization as the highest goal of life, love and devotion for God, the oneness of existence, and the harmony of religions.
• Rumors spread to Kamarpukur that Ramakrishna had gone mad as a result of his over-taxing spiritual exercises at Dakshineswar. Alarmed, neighbors advised Ramakrishna’s mother that he be persuaded to marry, so that he might be more conscious of his responsibilities to the family.
• Sarada, his child bride was Ramakrishna's first disciple. He attempted to teach her everything he had learned from his various gurus. She is believed to have mastered every religious secret as quickly as Ramakrishna had. Impressed by her religious potential, he began to treat her as the Universal Mother Herself and performed a puja considering Sarada as veritable Tripura Sundari Devi. He said, 'I look upon you as my own mother and the Mother who is in the temple'. Ramakrishna impressed upon Sarada Devi that she was not only the mother of his young disciples, but also of all humanity. Her renunciation is believed by devotees to be a striking quality that she shared with her husband in a measure equal to, if not beyond, his. The true nature of their relationship and kinship was believed to be beyond the grasp of ordinary minds. Ramakrishna concluded, after close and constant association with her, that her relationship and attitude toward him were firmly based on a divine spiritual plane. Devotees believe that as they shared their daily lives, no other thought other than that of the divine presence, arose in their minds.”

Re Abraham, Moses and Noah: don't they belong as much in the Quran and Thora as in the Bible? Didn't Jesus make it clear when asked about divorce, that from the beginning God meant for couples to be like Adam and Eve, lifelong companions (without polygamy or divorce), and it was hardness of human heart that changed that practice in the Old Testament days, not a change in God's plan? Adultery was the only valid ground Jesus gave for initiating divorce. When a man and woman are deeply in love, without following any instruction from any religion, don't they both feel complete without missing a third person? Isn't that the proof that God meant it to be that way, and all other variations of relationships are only due to the hardness of human heart (insatiable false ego needs) rather than a legitimate human need? (Aside, when I see couples who have been happily married for many years, I stand in awe of that relationship as before a great artistic maserpiece, for that is what a true love relationship is.)

You wrote, “gautami had a wife and children that he left to become the buddha- is that responsible desirable behavior?”

Gautama Buddha did abandon his wife and only child to go in search of enlightenment. For whatever reason in the spiritual scheme of things, one is allowed to forsake one’s worldly connections and go in search of God, in order to love and serve the greater family of humanity selflessly as God's instrument. Anyway Gautama’s “irresponsible and undesirable behaviour” helped found a very powerful religion. Didn’t Jesus also ask His disciples to forsake everything and everyone and follow Him, and many Catholics do that literally by becoming nuns and priests, and at one time, however short that might have been, you did feel a similar calling and choose to follow it?

Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

well angry people, so what?

go outside- its spring-

do ross or deb or any other angry ones imagine this is changing any hearts?

if someone is inclined toward anger- or looking for hate or violence- they will vibrate and resonate with your messages-

if someone is looking for enlightenment and a superior code of living they will find that too-

bleeding heart liberals?

im starting to think youre some old white guy in texas deb-

mercy you guys- go write a poem- or fall inlove or something-
life is just too short! bounce bounce bounce bou

Abdul, as usual, fulminated thus:

"HERE IS MY QUESTION TO EVERY ONE HERE, HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE READ THE QORAN, LET ME SEE HOW MANY REALLY DID, AND HOW MANY OF YOU BELONGS TO 700 CLUB AND HOW MANY TO 666 CLUB?"

I have read the three English translations of the Quran (as it is on the USC MSA website). The translations are by Marmaduke Pickthall, Abdullah Yusuf Ali and Shakir, verse for verse for each and every surah (114 of them in all). Each of them is prefaced by Syed Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi's tafseer or (learned) commentary which is to show what the meaning of the various sections of the verses and the surahs mean and what can be derived from them if one is to know what Islam is - from Muslim sources.

The site is run by Muslims and information is also gathered from authentic Muslim sources, not some Jo Blo academic comfy-sitting at some desk in some remote office in an equally obscure university campus. These academics write papers for their own gain to get funded and the funding comes from terrorist-sponsoring countries like Saudi Arabia. Good !

The scholars from whom these translations and the explanatory information are documented at the USC-MSA website, have NOT been discredited in any form. So, my (and similar others) knowledge of Islam is from authentic sources as per USC-MSA website. (Other websites have been cited by the various defenders of faith (Islam), but none of these cited websites have disagreed with the main contents of the USC-MSA website.)

The most chilling fact to learn about Islam is that Islam is not a religion of peace - quite contrary to what the scholars and academics say on a repeated basis on various forums. (This is from the USC-MSA website.)

Actually these pan-Islamic academics and the bleeding heart liberals are the major source of the problem.

And just visit the website that Ross has cited; Islam, as found in the website of a former Muslim (Ali Sina), does appear as a barbaric religion.

I have read the sources and concluded that all human beings must reject Islam. Only then the world shall see peace.

P.S.: Use Google to find the USC-MSA website. I do not belong to the 700 or 666 club. Though I cannot see what's wrong with those clubs compared to the 1.6 billion membership in the club of Islam ?

My point was the child was being cause "Osama, American-hater and terrorist", which is more in line with the Jewish community than the African-American community. I have never heard blacks being called these types of names whereas Jews have been. The article, had it used this anology, it would have made more sense.

Abdul,

I prefer to think and use my brains than to blindly follow any ideology. Just because you are dependent on religion why do assume everyone has to have a religion ?
What makes you think I am a christian evangelist or follow any religion at all ?

All your Allah can offer those you bow before him are 72 houris, even after I die I would prefer to increase my knowledge to serve mankind.

to discuss further you are most welcome to
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/

well quivcera youre entitled to your opinion-

and i challenge you to find one instance of bashing another religion-
or even presenting one in an unfavorable light-

or personal attacks or observations even when overtly attacked
as for personal observations, well youre entitled to that too- and my writing style is my own and while subject to your critique- is not likely to change.

im in a mulsim panelists question- so ill continue to express myself as i see fit- in a mannerly and passionate fashion- thanks for the input although i tend not to give much credence to unsubstantiated claims-

but i take great offense at you saying im being deceitful in my question about dhimmitude

if you went to the israel qustion to a jewish panelists repsonse and suggested to jewish people that their own discrimination was brought on themselves- and told hasidic jews their cultural dress made them deserved targets-

well- we both know you wouldnt do that- but you seem quite comfortablemaking such an unwarranted accusation here-

this is america- you have a right to express yourself as do i-

PAULA- im sorry for your troubles- since this is the ONLY question on these boards that deal with muslim discrimination- that would be the reason that it is dealt with here-

there is an entire question devoted to anti-semitism- while this is only one response within an entire question- its a tight space and a big subject to fill it- so were expressing ourselves here-

i lived in chicago for 5 years and just moved from there- and on the south side too-
there is a large african american muslim population there-

he is relating an experience based on the injustice of it and to illustrate how discriination has children who are victims of what the adults are doing-
any racism implied is your projection

abdul i have posted at length on zionism in the question on israel- there are many many interesting and substantiated articles there-

Paula you must know the difference between JEWS and ZIONISTS, Still today in this time of hatred real jews and muslim live side by side in many countries, just get your facts straight.

and BTW the Nazis killed more Jews than Muslims in the entire history books.

And what you say it true about muslims then why did the Jews choose to create Isreal oout of no where but next to muslims by taking their property their rights and imprisoning generations after generations in camps and commit atrocities on women and children. After centuries if the Zionist think they have the right of return to the promise land then WHY ARE THEY DENYING PALESTINIANS OF THEIR RIGHTS TO RETURN TO THEIR PROPERTIES AND THEIR OWN LANDS.

This is for you ROSS, in my culture there is a saying it goes like this:

"YOU CANNOT STRAIGHTEN OUT A DOG CURVED TAIL EVEN IF YOU PUT IT IN A STEEL CAST FOR TWELVE YEARS"

You dont learn do you, the most unfortunate person is the one who is ignorant, you are that blessed ignorant who was offered illumination of knowledge by the Lord Almighty but you still prefer to stay ignorant and spill the filth from your mouth rather than you know where..........
steel cast dont work on you it a fact.

HERE IS MY QUESTION TO EVERY ONE HERE, HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE READ THE QORAN, LET ME SEE HOW MANY REALLY DID, AND HOW MANY OF YOU BELONGS TO 700 CLUB AND HOW MANY TO 666 CLUB?

make sure to answer this question each and everyone of you who writes so we know who is intelligent enough and who is just forwarding messages by Jerry falwell and Pat robertson.

This has been happening to the Jewish population for centuries. I notice you failed to mention this fact in your article. Is it because Muslims dislike the Jews? Muslims are taught in schools that Jews are pigs and monkeys, this fact was verified by the school teachers in February of this year. Jews were called Christ killer and much worse, they were exterminated in the thousands. But you chose to mirror what happened to this womans son to the black cause. Why is that? Is it because the racism against blacks is a popular cause? Had you spoken of the similarities of Jewish racism to what is sometimes happening to some Muslims, I might have believed you. As it stands, this is just another bogus whining of the Muslim community.

Victoria:

I did not insinuate that Muslims deserve the prejudice lobbed their way, nor did I say that wearing hijab invites abuse. I merely pointed out that a) a certain amount of prejudice seems to be inevitable when the perceived differences between one group of people and another in a society is large; b) the more different an individual appears to be from the majority norm, the more likely that he/she will be the target of prejudice; and c) by western ethical standards, there is much within the Qu'ran, the hadith, and Islamic history that is repugnant. None of this "justifies" prejudice against Muslims, but it does serve to put things into a rational perspective.

I find some of your other statements questionable. First, it is highly unlikely that Muslims "invented" sociology. The origins of this particular social science are obscure, but almost surely go back to late classical, pre-Islamic times. The predeliction of Islam to overtake a geographic area, then attribute all of the cultural innovations associated with that region to Islam, is one of the less appealing facets of this religion. Second, speak only to what you know. I have seen Muslims pray in public areas of this country in many places, including parks, hospitals, school playgrounds, and skating rinks. It happens, although I suspect that more circumspect Muslims avoid this. Naturally there is nothing wrong with a Muslim praying, but praying in public DOES attract a lot of attention. It is especially uncomfortable for Christians, as their Bible enjoins them to close their doors and pray in private, so that their piety is rewarded by God rather than public opinion. Finally, you ask where the status of dhimmi exists in the modern world. That is a deceitful question. The LEGAL status of dhimmitude has been abolished throughout the world (under the influence of colonialism and/or international pressure) but the SOCIAL status is firmly entrenched. The harrassment of Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, Parsi, and Hindu minorities in predominantly Muslim areas is well-documented from Indonesia to Algeria. Non-Muslim businesses are vandalized, non-Muslim girls are forcibly married to Muslim men, non-Muslim children abducted and brought up as Muslims. Or consider the recent case of the Hindu mountain-climber in Malaysia. The government insisted on giving him a Muslim burial, over the strenuous objections of his wife, on the grounds that he had converted. There was no evidence of this conversion. In Egypt I knew a Coptic Christian family whose house had been burglarized by their neighbors four times in two years. Even though they knew who had robbed them, the police refused to investigate the case, because the burglars were Muslim and the Copts were not. In most of these types of cases the perpetrators get off scott-free because their accusers are not Muslims, therefore their word carries little weight in a court of law. The STATUS of dhimmitude is alive and well.

As for your own experience with prejudice against Muslims - a Muslim friend of mine wonders how much of that is something you are bringing upon yourself. According to Sa'id, many American converts have an in-your-face approach to proseletyzing that is counterproductive, to say the least. You deride the note of "desperation" you detect from Christian apologists as they defend their faith. Have you considered the tone of your own contributions here? They range from
condescending to shrill and strident. You also engage in a fair amount of religion-bashing of your own. And in all of your many writings you have pretty much skirted the issue of what should be done about prejudice against Muslims. Instead, you've used this forum as a soapbox for Islamic apologetics.

One final thought. What is the rationale behind your ee cummings style of writing? The rather haphazard delivery I've encountered in this forum is understandable in those whose native tongue is not English, but I'm sure you were trained in grammar and punctuation. A few typos are understandable, but an entire diatribe delivered without even a nod to the elements of style makes your arguments hard to read, and detracts from your message. The laissez-faire mode is fine for chat rooms, but inappropriate for a forum of this nature. Take a hint from Eboo Patel himself. His essay was polished and cogent.

Wishing you the best.

Quicreva

Who said celibacy ? One does not have to be a celibate. I dont recall mentioning celibacy in my post.

What i meant was elimination of vices like greed, lust, pride, envy.

You are trying to distort love and lust here, how on earth did Mo have true love for his 13+ wives and concubines ?

Your prophet never lived this "strict" way. All he really did was raid, kill, fight wars, force people to pray and enjoy women of all ages. How can one call that strict.

Victoria wrote:
what about krishna and rama? (the married woman used to leave their husbands to follow krishna to the groves where he would manifest himself into many incarnations so he could enjoy them all simultaneously)

Is that how you justify Mo having multiple wives and concubines ? Infact Mo was worse, he killed the husband before marrying the women.

Victoria wrote:
but im still amazed you equate my freedom to love my husband as a srrict system on one hand- and then go to denounce the Prophet(pbuh) for living n this 'strict' way?

How on earth did you reach that conclusion from my post? perhaps you confuse true love with lust.

It was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on December 10,1948 Ross-

to you celibacy is equivalent to closeness to divine experience?

and youre telling ME i love a strict system!

i was a novitiate and celibate for a long time ross-

there is no moral superiority in closing oneself off to ones sexuality-

what about krishna and rama? (the married woman used to leave their husbands to follow krishna to the groves where he would manifest himself into many incarnations so he could enjoy them all simultaneously)
what about brahma and vishnu and shiva?

what about ramakrishna? what about abraham and moses and noah?

gautami had a wife and children that he left to becme the buddha- is that responsible desirable behavior?

so youre reasoning is that living as a holistic human being and an example for other humans-
this invalidates somehow the mission of the prophet?

and to renounce the loving of another human is the way to love?

ok- but i dont agree-

have you ever been to a temple of monks in the spring?

i have- and i tell you honestly that human nature being what it is- all that frantic energy repressd into prayer is a manic experience-

so im still happy with islam ross-

but im still amazed you equate my freedom to love my husband as a srrict system on one hand- and then go to denounce the Prophet(pbuh) for living n this 'strict' way?

rethink this one ross

thank you- bouncy was meant to uplift

Victoria wrote,

why would i renounce islam?
i love it!

You probably love the strict system enforced by islam. There is no concept of love for allah in islam. Simply put, there is no Allah OR if he exists he is not God. No one has ever received any message from him other the Mo.
People who have had a divine experience or who yearn God's presence mostly end up renouncing worldly vices like lust, pride, greed etc. The guru's or sanysins in hinduism, the monk of christianity or buddhism are good examples. Famous name here are buddha, Mahavira, John the baptist, St. Paul, Guru Nanak etc.

So why was Mo the opposite after receiving these revelations ? He is not alone though there are others in category like David koresh, Jim Jones, Bhagwan Rajneesh, Charles Manson etc, All of them started indulging in worldly pleasures after their divine experience.

Why is Mo not in the first category ?

You need to do some serious soul searching.

Victoria wrote,
ROSS- youre so crazy

Victoria,
your are the one posting meaningless posts like
"The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Quran" , this declaration is meant for countries and it is the islamic governments around the world that are furtherest away from from implementing them. Why dont you sent it to their embassies instead ?

I think your b o u n c y thing was cute though !

i dont follow you deb, what?

i dont know any mullahs- did you mean creed?

why would i renounce islam?

i love it!

o i saw your question pablo-

do i believe the whole world should be muslim one day?

it would be nice for me-

do i believe that the whole world WILL be muslim one day?

you know thats interesting- i was reading the quran and i came upon a passage that said one day all will become muslims in the world-

but that would be as ALLAH leads people- not people doing it-

if god wills it- it would be a beautiful thing-

but pablo- its hard for some to imagine because they have a false idea of what islam is- so it sounds terrible to them- it would sound terrible to me too- if i thought some of the horrific ideas ive heard misunderstood on these boards and fox news alone-

but the real islam?
the vibrant worship of ALLAH
all the people in the world saying the same words of praise in the same language in the same key!

all unified in purpose and intent and heart and mind and body and song.

that would be a most extraordinary thing

its like how i imagine the angels who are constantly worshipping ALLAH -

but with will and purpose and strength and accord and harmony-

but no human can force such a thing to be-
no no no- it has to be from each individuals thirst for connection to ALLAH- yes yes yes

a completely and totally naturally occurrence

its not like a competition thing

its something ALLAH will orchestrate as s/he sees fit-

also there is no concept of gender specificity when it comes to god- no male or female-

was that your challenge?

challenges are so confrontational-

there will be no confrontation in such an event

only the confrontation of the soul asking itself and the heart polishing itself to reflect the god

ok?

so how did you enjoy the human rights docuent i submitted?

did it give you a clearer idea of what islam really is?
i hope so-

ok then- hope that was what you were asking

peace all

by the way- that bouncy looked really great when i made it it had curlicues and made an intersting pattern that got lost in the post-

ROSS- youre so crazy
peace all

Victoria:

I think that your renouncing Islam is far easier in USA than to regurgitate the screed that some foolish mullah had asked you to do on the WP forum.

Dear Mr Patel

It is saddening to hear that in a country with a Christian majority there is irrational fear of Muslims because of the violent actions of a few. All religions can "boast" of such people, who have misused religion and brought shame to the religion as a whole. It is my hope that the work you and other Muslims are doing towards portraying the spiritual wealth of Islam, and the willingness of people of other faiths to open their eyes to the great contribution of Islam to world culture (think of Taj Mahal among others), your inter-faith work, and the education about religions that is being proposed, will gradually change the outlook of non-Muslims towards Muslims. Yes, even as an Indian-Australian, as one who feels like a member of the global family, it is my fervent wish that your child, and other Muslim children (as all minority groups) will grow up in a society that respects all religions. I have found that most intolerance and hatred comes from ignorance - spiritual and otherwise. You are lucky to be living in the US which has the genius to learn and adopt new ways quickly.

Wishing you and your wife the birth of a healthy baby and much joy in your fatherhood!

Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

In the Name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Quran

By Omar Edaibat

Al-Jazeerah, April 30, 2004

The following is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that was adopted on December 10, 1948 by the General Assembly of the United Nations. The attempt of this analysis is to show how each of the fundamental human rights guaranteed in this declaration were already established in the Holy Quran.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Preamble

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in cooperation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, therefore,

The General Assembly,

Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.
Article 1

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

The Quran also reiterates our common humanity and equality:

[3:95] Their Lord responded to them: "I never fail to reward any worker among you for any work you do, be you male or female - you are equal to one another.…

[4:25] … GOD knows best about your belief, and you are equal to one another, as far as belief is concerned…

[17:70] We have honored the children of Adam, and provided them with rides on land and in the sea. We provided for them good provisions, and we gave them greater advantages than many of our creatures.
Article 2

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

The Quran repeatedly explains that it is the human factor which divides us from uniting under our common Creator and Sustainer. It is the human factor which splits us into sects and divides us along superficial lines, pitting us against one another. We are all members of the same community in the eyes of God, and the only quality that distinguishes one above the other is our level of righteousness. Hence, the Quranic injunction not to differentiate between God’s messengers and to commemorate God Alone:

[2:62] Surely, those who believe, those who are Jewish, the Christians, and the converts; anyone who (1) believes in GOD, and (2) believes in the Last Day, and (3) leads a righteous life, will receive their recompense from their Lord. They have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve.

[2:136] Say, "We believe in GOD, and in what was sent down to us, and in what was sent down to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, and the Patriarchs; and in what was given to Moses and Jesus, and all the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction among any of them. To Him alone we are submitters."

[49:13] O people, we created you from the same male and female, and rendered you distinct peoples and tribes that you may recognize one another. The best among you in the sight of GOD is the most righteous. GOD is Omniscient, Cognizant.
Article 3

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

[17:33] You shall not kill any person - for GOD has made life sacred - except in the course of justice. If one is killed unjustly, then we give his heir authority to enforce justice. Thus, he shall not exceed the limits in avenging the murder, he will be helped.

[2:191] You may kill those who wage war against you, and you may evict them whence they evicted you. Oppression is worse than murder…

[7:157] …He exhorts them to be righteous, enjoins them from evil, allows for them all good food, and prohibits that which is bad, and unloads the burdens and the shackles imposed upon them. Those who believe in him, respect him, support him, and follow the light that came with him are the successful ones."

The Quran goes as far as urging us to take whatever measures necessary to ensure that the fundamental Human Rights of others are met:

[4:75] Why should you not fight in the cause of GOD when weak men, women, and children are imploring: "Our Lord, deliver us from this community whose people are oppressive, and be You our Lord and Master."
Article 4

No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

When the Quran was revealed slavery was in wide practice throughout the Arab World. Thus, it would have been impractical and suicidal to place an immediate ban on all forms of slavery. The Quran uses a better psychological approach to win people’s hearts in the struggle against slavery and all forms of discrimination by placing a strong emphasis on human dignity and equality and encouraging the freeing of slaves, for if we are all equal then slavery cannot be justified:

[90:10-14] Did we not show him the two paths? He should choose the difficult path. Which one is the difficult path? The freeing of slaves. Feeding, during the time of hardship.

[2:177] Righteousness is not turning your faces towards the east or the west. Righteous are those who believe in GOD, the Last Day, the angels, the scripture, and the prophets; and they give the money, cheerfully, to the relatives, the orphans, the needy, the traveling alien, the beggars, and to free the slaves;…

[9:60] Charities shall go to the poor, the needy, the workers who collect them, the new converts, to free the slaves, to those burdened by sudden expenses, in the cause of GOD, and to the traveling alien. Such is GOD's commandment. GOD is Omniscient, Most Wise.
Article 5

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

In the Quan, we are constantly reminded to take heed from the lessons of history and are sensitized to the gross evils of tyranny. The lack of mercy is also condemned:

[28:4] Pharaoh turned into a tyrant on earth, and discriminated against some people. He persecuted a helpless group of them, slaughtering their sons, while sparing their daughters. He was indeed wicked.

[2:191] You may kill those who wage war against you, and you may evict them whence they evicted you. Oppression is worse than murder…

[26:130] "And when you strike, you strike mercilessly.
Article 6

Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

A philosophy in which we are all equal before our common Creator and Provider reassures us of deferential and equal treatment before the law, irrespective of where we may be:

[35:10] Anyone seeking dignity should know that to GOD belongs all dignity. To Him ascends the good words, and He exalts the righteous works. As for those who scheme evil works, they incur severe retribution; the scheming of such people is destined to fail.
Article 7

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

[4:25] …GOD knows best about your belief, and you are equal to one another, as far as belief is concerned…

[4:135] O you who believe, you shall be absolutely equitable, and observe GOD, when you serve as witnesses, even against yourselves, or your parents, or your relatives. Whether the accused is rich or poor, GOD takes care of both. Therefore, do not be biased by your personal wishes. If you deviate or disregard (this commandment), then GOD is fully Cognizant of everything you do.

The following Quranic narration highlights how important it is to give everyone the same respect and attention irrespective of one’s socioeconomic background:

[80:1-11] He (Muhammad) frowned and turned away when the blind man came to him (seeking guidance). How do you know? He may purify himself. Or he may take heed, and benefit from the message. As for the rich man, you gave him your attention. Even though you could not guarantee his salvation. The one who came to you eagerly and is really reverent, you ignored him. Indeed, this is a reminder.
Article 8

Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

The Quran encourages mercy and forgiveness whenever possible but decrees equivalent punishment as a fundamental right guarnateed to the victim:

[2:178] O you who believe, equivalence is the law decreed for you when dealing with murder - the free for the free, the slave for the slave, the female for the female. If one is pardoned by the victim's kin, an appreciative response is in order, and an equitable compensation shall be paid. This is an alleviation from your Lord and mercy. Anyone who transgresses beyond this incurs a painful retribution.

[16:126] And if you punish, you shall inflict an equivalent punishment. But if you resort to patience (instead of revenge), it would be better for the patient ones.
Article 9

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

We are constantly warned not to be overly suspicious of others without incriminating evidence. Such attitudes only bring about unjustified hostility and harm towards the accused:

[49:12] O you who believe, you shall avoid any suspicion, for even a little bit of suspicion is sinful. You shall not spy on one another, nor shall you backbite one another; this is as abominable as eating the flesh of your dead brother. You certainly abhor this. You shall observe GOD. GOD is Redeemer, Most Merciful.

Article 10

Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Certainly, the Quran highlights the need for imparitality on all matters within the community:

[2:143] We thus made you an impartial community, that you may serve as witnesses among the people, and the messenger serves as a witness among you….
Article 11

1. Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
2. No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

See relevant verses above.
Article 12

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

The Quran also highlights the need to ensure our privacy as individuals. For example, we see the Quranic injunction not to marry women who were previously married to our fathers. This rule ensures that we do not interfere with the private experiences and intimate thoughts that our fathers shared with their wives:

[33:53] O you who believe, do not enter the prophet's homes unless you are given permission to eat, nor shall you force such an invitation in any manner. If you are invited, you may enter. When you finish eating, you shall leave; do not engage him in lengthy conversations. This used to hurt the prophet, and he was too shy to tell you. But GOD does not shy away from the truth. If you have to ask his wives for something, ask them from behind a barrier. This is purer for your hearts and their hearts. You are not to hurt the messenger of GOD. You shall not marry his wives after him, for this would be a gross offense in the sight of GOD.

-----------------------------------------

*33:53 We are enjoined in 4:22 from marrying women who were previously married to our fathers. Nor can the father marry the divorced wife of his genetic son (4:23). This divine commandment preserves our respect for our fathers and their most private affairs. Similarly, the prophet was a father figure to the believers of his time. For the good of those believers, God enjoined them from marrying women who were previously married to the prophet. Marriage is a sacred and very private relationship, and the prophet's private life was better kept private.

[24:58] O you who believe, permission must be requested by your servants and the children who have not attained puberty (before entering your rooms). This is to be done in three instances - before the Dawn Prayer, at noon when you change your clothes to rest, and after the Night Prayer. These are three private times for you. At other times, it is not wrong for you or them to mingle with one another. GOD thus clarifies the revelations for you. GOD is Omniscient, Most Wise.

Privacy of the individual is emphasized:

[24:2729] O you who believe, do not enter homes other than yours without permission from their inhabitants, and without greeting them. This is better for you, that you may take heed. If you find no one in them, do not enter them until you obtain permission. If you are told, "Go back," you must go back. This is purer for you. GOD is fully aware of everything you do. You commit no error by entering uninhabited homes wherein there is something that belongs to you. GOD knows everything you reveal, and everything you conceal.

The reputation of the individual must be protected from all forms of unjustified attack or slander:

[104:1] Woe to every backbiter, slanderer.
Article 13

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State.
2. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

The Quran gurantees the right of the oppressed to emigrate in the cause of God (the course of justice) and to rebel against all forms of oppression:

[4:100] Anyone who emigrates in the cause of God will find on earth great bounties and richness.

[4:97] Those whose lives are terminated by the angels, while in a state of wronging their souls, the angels will ask them, "What was the matter with you?" They will say, "We were oppressed on earth." They will say, "Was GOD's earth not spacious enough for you to emigrate therein?"….
Article 14

1. Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
2. This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

See above.
Article 15

1. Everyone has the right to a nationality.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

A respect for all cultures as members of the one universal humanity is recognized throught the Quran:

[5:48] …Had GOD willed, He could have made you one congregation. But He thus puts you to the test through the revelations He has given each of you. You shall compete in righteousness. To GOD is your final destiny - all of you - then He will inform you of everything you had disputed.

[49:13] O people, we created you from the same male and female, and rendered you distinct peoples and tribes, that you may recognize one another. The best among you in the sight of GOD is the most righteous. GOD is Omniscient, Cognizant.

Article 16

1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

The sanctity of the family is clearly recognized, with a strong emphasis on the need to reconcile relationships equitably. The Quran also guranteed women with divorce rights at a time when their subordination was the traditional norm:

[25:54] He is the One who created from water a human being, then made him reproduce through marriage and mating. Your Lord is Omnipotent.

[30:21] Among His proofs is that He created for you spouses from among yourselves, in order to have tranquility and contentment with each other, and He placed in your hearts love and care towards your spouses. In this, there are sufficient proofs for people who think.

[2:102]…These two did not divulge such knowledge without pointing out: "This is a test. You shall not abuse such knowledge." But the people used it in such evil schemes as the breaking up of marriages….

[4:129] You can never be equitable in dealing with more than one wife, no matter how hard you try. Therefore, do not be so biased as to leave one of them hanging (neither enjoying marriage, nor left to marry someone else). If you correct this situation and maintain righteousness, GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.

[2:241] The divorcees also shall be provided for, equitably. This is a duty upon the righteous.

[4:35] If a couple fears separation, you shall appoint an arbitrator from his family and an arbitrator from her family; if they decide to reconcile, GOD will help them get together. GOD is Omniscient, Cognizant.

Article 17

1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Our right to property is clearly spelled out:

[2:05] As soon as he leaves, he roams the earth corruptingly, destroying properties and lives. GOD does not love corruption.

[65:1] O you prophet, when you people divorce the women, you shall ensure that a divorce interim is fulfilled. You shall measure such an interim precisely. You shall reverence GOD your Lord. Do not evict them from their homes, nor shall you make life miserable for them, to force them to leave on their own, unless they commit a proven adultery. These are GOD's laws. Anyone who transgresses GOD's laws commits an injustice against himself. You never know; maybe GOD wills something good to come out of this.

[4:2] You shall hand over to the orphans their rightful properties. Do not substitute the bad for the good, and do not consume their properties by combining them with yours. This would be a gross injustice.

[4:6] You shall test the orphans when they reach puberty. As soon as you find them mature enough, give them their property. Do not consume it extravagantly in a hurry, before they grow up…

[4:29] O you who believe, do not consume each others' properties illicitly - only mutually acceptable transactions are permitted. You shall not kill yourselves. GOD is Merciful towards you.

[38:24] He said, "He is being unfair to you by asking to combine your sheep with his. Most people who combine their properties treat each other unfairly, except those who believe and work righteousness, and these are so few." Afterwards, David wondered if he made the right judgment. He thought that we were testing him. He then implored his Lord for forgiveness, bowed down, and repented.

[59:8] (You shall give) to the needy who immigrated. They were evicted from their homes and deprived of their properties, because they sought GOD's grace and pleasure, and because they supported GOD and His messenger. They are the truthful.
Article 18

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.

Unlike most traditional Islamic societies, the Quran guarantees each idividual complete freedom of religion:

[2:256] There shall be no compulsion in religion: the right way is now distinct from the wrong way. Anyone who denounces the devil and believes in GOD has grasped the strongest bond; one that never breaks. GOD is Hearer, Omniscient.
Article 19

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Here we see how each individual must be ensured of the right to his own beliefs and way of life:

[18:29] Proclaim: "This is the truth from your Lord," then whoever wills let him believe, and whoever wills let him disbelieve.....
Article 20

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
2. No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Compelling others to accept your own beliefs and values is a completely alien concept to the Quran. We are each free to choose our own associations and paths in life. Infact the Quran even recognizes that there is more than one path to God:

[2:62] Surely, those who believe, those who are Jewish, the Christians, and the converts; anyone who (1) believes in GOD, and (2) believes in the Last Day, and (3) leads a righteous life, will receive their recompense from their Lord. They have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve.

[2:148] Each of you chooses the direction to follow; you shall race towards righteousness. Wherever you may be, GOD will summon you all. GOD is Omnipotent.

Thus, what we believe is our own individual choice and nobody has the right to interfere with our own personal decisions so long as they do not infringe on the rights of others.
Article 21

1. Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
2. Everyone has the right to equal access to public service in his country.
3. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Consensus and public accountability to the public in all policymaking is the Quranic standard:

[42:38] They respond to their Lord by observing the Contact Prayers (Salat). Their affairs are decided after due consultation among themselves, and from our provisions to them they give (to charity).

[39:18] They are the ones who examine all words, then follow the best. These are the ones whom GOD has guided; these are the ones who possess intelligence.
Article 22

Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

In the Quran, we clearly see the emphasis on a need for consensus, co-operation and on a compassionate approach to ensure the satisfaction of everyone:
[3:159] It was mercy from GOD that you became compassionate towards them. Had you been harsh and mean-hearted, they would have abandoned you. Therefore, you shall pardon them and ask forgiveness for them, and consult them….
Article 23

1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
2. Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

The Quran encourages commerce and commands us to be fair and equitable in all transactions:

[30:46] Among His proofs is that He sends the winds with good omen, to shower you with His mercy, and to allow the ships to run in the sea in accordance with His rules, and for you to seek His bounties (through commerce), that you may be appreciative.

[17:66] Your Lord is the One who causes the ships to float on the ocean, that you may seek His bounties. He is Most Merciful towards you.

[6:152] …You shall give full weight and full measure when you trade, equitably…

[11:85] "O my people, you shall give full measure and full weight, equitably. Do not cheat the people out of their rights, and do not roam the earth corruptingly.
Article 24

Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

The Quran gives us general statements on how rest is part of human nature. None should be denied a good night’s sleep as night and day are designated with their own specific functions in meeting our needs. Denial of our right to a reasonable amount of leisure time would be detrimental to our health and contrary to what the Quran prescribes for us:

[28:73] It is mercy from Him that He created for you the night and the day in order to rest (during the night), then seek His provisions (during the day), that you may be appreciative.

[33:53] …do not engage him in lengthy conversations. This used to hurt the prophet, and he was too shy to tell you. But GOD does not shy away from the truth…

Article 25

1. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
2. Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

The Quran guarantees social justice for everyone through the goals of fasting, zakat and prayer. Fasting is meant to instill within us a greater sense of empathy and social awareness towards the less fortunate. By voluntarily depriving ourselves of our need for food we are not only exerting self- restraint, but we are also more importantly inculcating within ourselves a greater sense of gratitude towards our Provider and generosity towards the poor. Zakat prescribes that we must set aside 2.5% of what we receive from our paychecks as a charity to those in need. These are religious duties upon every Muslim. Voluntary charity and caring for the orphans is also strongly encouraged.

[107:1-7] Do you know who really rejects the faith? That is the one who mistreats the orphans. And does not advocate the feeding of the poor. And woe to those who observe the contact prayers (Salat) - who are totally heedless of their prayers. They only show off. And they forbid charity.

[36:47] When they are told, "Give from GOD's provisions to you," those who disbelieve say to those who believe, "Why should we give to those whom GOD could feed, if He so willed? You are really far astray."

[2:215] They ask you about giving: say, "The charity you give shall go to the parents, the relatives, the orphans, the poor, and the traveling alien." Any good you do, GOD is fully aware thereof.

[70:24-25] Part of their money is set aside. For the poor and the needy.
Article 26

1. Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
2. Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
3. Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

The Quran generally encourages seeking God’s bounties and learning, emphasizing the use of our faculties to verify information. God is against anything that hinders the gaining of knowledge and encourages us to think freely rather than beeing blinded by our own traditions and values. We are also asked to open our eyes and reflect on God’s creation:

[86:5] Let the human reflect on his creation.

[54:17] We made the Quran easy to learn. Does any of you wish to learn?

[17:36] You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them.

[39:18] They are the ones who examine all words, then follow the best. These are the ones whom GOD has guided; these are the ones who possess intelligence.
Article 27

1. Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

It is a human tendency found in all cultures and religions to impose limitations upon ourselves that prevent us from enjoying God’s blessings. Such is the case in much of the Muslim World, as cultures impose upon themselves, especially upon women, limitations and restrictions that stunt their social, economical, and psychological development. All unreasonable limitations on our freedoms as individuals are condemned in the Quran:

[7:32] Say, "Who prohibited the nice things GOD has created for His creatures, and the good provisions?" Say, "Such provisions are to be enjoyed in this life by those who believe. Moreover, the good provisions will be exclusively theirs on the Day of Resurrection." We thus explain the revelations for people who know.
[22:78] You shall strive for the cause of GOD as you should strive for His cause. He has chosen you and has placed no hardship on you in practicing your religion - the religion of your father Abraham…
[2:185] …GOD wishes for you convenience, not hardship, that you may fulfill your obligations, and to glorify GOD for guiding you, and to express your appreciation.
Article 28

Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

Similarly, all human beings are to be guarnateed all their rights in the Quran by virtue of being human.
Article 29

1. Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
2. In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
3. These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

The Quran strictly ensures us our rights so long as we do not infringe on the freedoms of others. It also reiterates that nothing shall abrogate God’s words:

[18:27] You shall recite what is revealed to you of your Lord's scripture. Nothing shall abrogate His words, and you shall not find any other source beside it.

[5:8] O you who believe, you shall be absolutely equitable, and observe GOD, when you serve as witnesses. Do not be provoked by your conflicts with some people into committing injustice. You shall be absolutely equitable, for it is more righteous. You shall observe GOD. GOD is fully Cognizant of everything you do.

[4:171] O people of the scripture, do not transgress the limits of your religion, and do not say about GOD except the truth….
Article 30

Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

Remarkably, the Quran takes note of the human tendeny to use religion as an ideological tool in the oppression of others to meet corrupt and political agendas. It thus strongly condenms such behaviour:

[3:7] He sent down to you this scripture, containing straightforward verses - which constitute the essence of the scripture - as well as multiple-meaning or allegorical verses. Those who harbor doubts in their hearts will pursue the multiple-meaning verses to create confusion, and to extricate a certain meaning. None knows the true meaning thereof except GOD and those well founded in knowledge. They say, "We believe in this - all of it comes from our Lord." Only those who possess intelligence will take heed.

[2:79] Therefore, woe to those who distort the scripture with their own hands, then say, "This is what GOD has revealed," seeking a cheap material gain. Woe to them for such distortion, and woe to them for their illicit gains.

[3:78] Among them are those who twist their tongues to imitate the scripture, that you may think it is from the scripture, when it is not from the scripture, and they claim that it is from GOD, when it is not from GOD. Thus, they utter lies and attribute them to GOD, knowingly.

QUICREVA- as one born in 'rome' i have to question your conversations or analysis-

were all lifelong students of sociology (actaully the science of sociology was created by muslims)

your opinion seems to insinuate that any prejudice against muslims is deserved becasue they are 'flaunting' their 'otherness'

its starts sounding reasonable- but descends into muslim-bashing- which were trying to stay away from here-

headscarves or hijab is not an invitation to be abused- muslims simply never pray in public places-
the only place ive every seen muslims pray publicly was in chicago in the park- the taxidrivers- no one else does such a thing-
only in extreme emergency would any muslim pray in public- and its still not a justificatio for abuse-

cultural markers of their heritage?

i have made no public comments to experience abuse- it was simply the knowledge that i am a muslim which incurred it-

your personal analysis while it may be your experience from a few conversations with aquaintances- is not representative of the discrimination occurring in america

and ibelieve that is the issue-
simply denying it or saying its the fault of the abused doesnt really add anything to the conversation except to demean the validity of those who have experienced it

having said that here is an interesting thing i found

Dear Contributors:

Forgive me: I was under the impression that this was supposed to be a forum for discussing Eboo Patel's experience with prejudice against Muslims. Instead, it has devolved into a vituperative ideological battle between Christians, Muslims, pagans, and secularists. Could we perhaps return to the salient issue? Is there genuine prejudice against Muslims in this country, and if so, what are the causes and what can be done to correct it?

As a lifelong student of sociology, I know that prejudice derives from a perception of difference between Us and Them. The greater perceived difference between one group and another, the more virulent the prejudice is likely to be. In early centuries, African Americans were seen as being so different from European Americans as to almost constitute a separate subspecies of humankind. As the social, economic and educational boundaries between the two groups have blurred, the prejudice has lessened. The Irish had a similar experience: Other European Americans, with a firmly entrenched Protestant work ethic, perceived these newcomers as lazy, drunken bums with an unpleasant accent. The Jews had a similar experience half a century later.

Now it's the turn for modern Muslims in America. In my observation, those who insist on maintaining purely cultural markers of their Islamic heritage are more likely to be the targets of bigotry than their more aculturated brethren. Muslim acquaintances who wear western clothing, speak good English, and send their kids to public schools tell me they have experienced very little prejudice. By contrast, those who wear headscarves (a custom not mandated by Islam per se), perform their daily prayers in public places, and insist on separate, Islamic education for their kids, often have trouble here. Moreover, Muslims who openly advocate the destruction of Israel, for example, or deny the Holocaust, or express sympathy for others who commit horrific acts in the name of Islam (or make excuses for those people), or make derogatory comments about Christianity and Judaism, etc. etc., are likely to receive some hostility from average Americans. There is great truth to the adage "When in Rome, do as the Romans do."

I believe that, as long as perceived differences persist between the various sub-groups of a society, a certain amount of prejudice will result. It seems to be human nature. Arguing over the respective merits of various religions and philosophies is not a constructive way to address this issue. As I said in my earlier comment, there is some justification for the extremely negative stereotype that Islam has in the west. The response of the Muslim commentators here has been either to deny that there is anything that could ever be construed as negative in Islam, or to turn the tables and accuse Christianity of the same transgressions. The non-Muslims respond by ripping Islam to shreds, or touting the politically correct notion that Islam is actually a religion of peace. None of this ideological fencing has any bearing on the issue of prejudice against Muslims in America. Please try to stick to the issue, friends.

yes historian- the family history says that the government gave him as much land as he could walk in 4 directions in 4 days- the square he walked is todays harrisburg-


sorry ross- im not being racist just stating my experience-

indian people seem to just love blue eyed women named victoria!

i dont feel patricularly threatened-

actually mexicans will shotly comprise 1/3 of the us population-

yes anonymous- and getting back to the point-

that was just indians who were mistaken formuslims!

now lets get back to what has actually been done and is being done to muslims in america!

This is for DEB chaterjee, in Hinduism there is a cast systems the highest cast are the BRAMANS who are rich and highly honourable in their society I dont think you belong in that cast, and the lowest cast are the SUDRAS (mostly janitors)since they are not being counted anywhere they are considered as UNTOUCHABLE because of their professions. I am pretty much sure, the reasons why you left the relegion of your forefathers, and came here in this forum trying to get the sympathy and respect from the westerner which you never got from your own i.e. hindus. Deb you think these folks would take care of you if you speak their language cursing other relegion and talk about immigration, GOOD LUCK with your new endevour. These people are so ignorant they did not even know where Iraq was on the map before the first gulf war. They even killed a SIKH Indian after 9/11 and labelled him muslim, they destroyed so many Indian Hindu owned convenient stores, you could have stayed with your fate and respected your own culture so rich it never had any distinction between a hindu and a muslim, its a shame DEB, if you were bold enough to change your first name why kept your last name Chaterjee why dont you change last name too, CHATTERLY would give you that satisfaction.

victoria wrote:
k deb, but whatcha gonna do about me?
my great time 8 daddy was the first senator of pennsylvania-
my other great granddaddy has the capitol of pennsylvania named after him-
there are buildings all over my city with my name on them-
weve been here for while and are pretty well loved-

Victoria,
As long as Americans listen to people like Deb, you will still be loved around there. If mass immigration continues and results in an islamic government then following will happen:

your great time 8 daddy was the first senator of pennsylvania will no longer exist because history books will be rewritten. Because he was a kafir he will be replaced by some Sheikh Mahound who was responsible for supressing the last kafir stronghold in that region.

Your other great granddaddy will no longer have the capitol of pennsylvania named after him because he was a kafir and the capiton will be renamed Hassanabad after some Zia Hassan who successfully introduced dhimmi laws in the US.

All the tall buildings will be renamed after the famous madarassaa in the arab nations.

As far as being loved around there is concerned this sadly will disappear with the arrival of asian, arab and african muslims, instead you'll just be a veiled woman spending the whole day in your house, not allowed to drive or travel anywhere without your husband or son.

victoria wrote:
sorry deb- but alot of americans dont make great distinctions between indians and pakistanis-

What makes you think americans will be the majority then ? I hate to say this but Asian or Arab muslims do not have a great deal of respect for white women, they always see them as women with loose morals. Your boasting about your great ancestory will infact increase their hated.
In such a situation Deb would receive more respect because atleast he's asian and looks like one of them.

I do not wish such things happen to you or your ancestory, I wish more buildings are named after them and their names continue to thrive in the nation they helped build.

The origin of name Harrisburg, Pennsylvania--the state capital

In 1719, John Harris, Sr., an English trader, settled here and 14 years later secured grants of 800 acres (3.2 km²) in this vicinity. In 1785, John Harris, Jr. made plans to lay out a town on his father's land, which he named Harrisburg. In the spring of 1785, the town was formally surveyed by William Maclay, who was a son-in-law of John Harris, Sr. In 1791, Harrisburg became incorporated and was named the Pennsylvania state capital in October 1812.

Terrorism

Terrorism is the use of violence for the primary purpose of creating a general atmosphere of fear and alarm. Thus, a terrorist organization does not limit its tactical use of violence to military and other such strategic targets but will additionally direct its violent tactics against the public at large. If employed by a government, the objective of such a use of terror can be to create submission to a repressive status quo. If used by an anti-governmental group, the objective may be to create a situation of instability in order to facilitate the overthrow of the existing government

HAPPY SPRING!!!

sproing boing bing leap cavort frolic caper

b
o
u
n
c
y

b
o
u
n
c
y

b
o
u
n
c
y

b
o
u
n
c
y

b
o
u
n
c
y

b
o
u

k deb, but whatcha gonna do about me?

my great time 8 daddy was the first senator of pennsylvania-

my other great granddaddy has the capitol of pennsylvania named after him-

there are buildings all over my city with my name on them-

weve been here for while and are pretty well loved-

and youre from india right deb?

sorry deb- but alot of americans dont make great distinctions between indians and pakistanis-
(alot of INDIANS dont make distinctions between indians and pakistanis for that matter)

this would probably affect you alot more than it would me- im here - without fear- so get used to it- (to paraphrase my rainbow friends)

The next presidential election in USA should also focus on immigration. Yes, Muslim immigration to USA should be severely restricted. Whereever Muslims have gone, they multiplied and eventually screwed all the existing rules. Look at France, Britain, Netherlands etc.

The western values and Islamic way of life are totally opposite. Yes, from Muslim's perspective Islam is right, as it is Allah's timeless message and blah blah. From US perspective, the US Constitution is supreme. In US, live the US way. The only way to preserve the US way is to limit Muslim immigration.

All the sorrows, fears, unrest and anger and the ensuing Clash of Civilizations should stop at the immigration check points/visa centers.

syndrome of people of the book.

jews and christians received divine revelation(tora and gospel),but they were very (smart)they said we take this part of the scriptue and leave this part,this part is lean and this part is hard.the (so smart) people of the book failed to understand that the lean part as well as the hard part of the scripture are from the creator lord who made them and know exactly what is good and what is bad.so the (smartness) of people of the book brought on them the syndrome of heart sealing,that doesnot accept the truth until they submit to their creator lord who created them .

yes indeed ,as a muslim i submit to the creator lord why not and he created me ,and my life and death is in his hands.

to those who are so brain smarted syndrome :
1-if you think that you are smarter than your creator lord,that you are programation free ,
see if you can creat a mosquto .

2-the word of the creator (quran)is challegeing every body,bring one verse similar,.bring better guidance ,bring better way of life ,bring your smart diagram if you so truthfull.

your smart diagram brought so much misery to this planet earth,that is manifest to every body and every species.

to muslims and none muslims ,there is creator for this universe,so ask him and seek his knowledge befor you run your smart brain and smart biger than your brain tongue.

frank- the point is most ineloquently made by yourself- irrational fear and hatred of islam (islamophobia) resulting in discrimination agaisnt its adherents

thank you for illustrating the point so succinctly

im sorry pablo- what was your challenge?

i have read the bible you fool and i have read the koran too. the bible is a history book and it outlines wars etc of the past - at least as to the old testament. the new testament has to do with jesus. neith one tells people that they are commanded to go out and murder anyone not their religion. the koran actually orders its followers to murder those who will not convert. and that is another islamic tactic - change the topic. i dont give a rats ass if one religion thinks it is the true religion and that others are wrong - my problem is with the islamic demand that those not islamic must convert or be killed. get the point islam boy.

Jihadist was right in implying. "Ibn Allah" is not a Muslim nor does "Ibn Allah" knows Arabic or Islam enough to call himself "Ibn Allah". Jihadist was mocking him.

I guess my challege will go un-answered. It was nice to be able to share the word of God with you all. The Muslims will not answer my challenge so I am moving on to find people who are interested.

Con el Amor de Jesús,

Pablo

"Mas Dios muestra su amor para con nosotros, en que siendo aún pecadores, Cristo murió por nosotros" (Romonos 5:8).

Ibn Allah noted:

To improve our image we should:

1) Ask what we, as Muslims, can do to win the hearts of non-Muslims.

2) We should take a honest look at our religion and reform its defects.

3) We should not deal with imams and countries that oppress women in concert with Islamic teachings.

4) We should swear to uphold the US Constitution and not allow sharia to take hold.

BRAVO!!! Finally a Muslim with concern and common sense. Maybe Jihadist and Victoria will someday make the same suggestions!!!

With respect to #2, I recommend having Professor JD Crossan clean out the defects of the Koran just like he did for the NT.

Umm, not to wander in here, but, umm, what kind of logic is *this* supposed to be?

"On 9-11 we witnessed the horrors of terrorism and 5000 “innocent” people died. It is sad to say but none of us is Innocent if we don’t do anything to prevent what is happening right now. Democracy works by majorities, and if the majority of people want war, then we all are guilty of its horrors."

Especially when the whole damn thing was doubtless for the *purpose* of starting this 'war?'

After this attack, a *majority* of people were lied to, and a *majority* said that if they believed the facts were actually what are now indisputably known to be the case, that they'd have been against a "war" that was a sick gleam in someone's eye *until* the attack happened.

Yeah, the war's a bad idea, but it's just *backwards* to say that the people who died that day *deserved* it cause they might in the future be part of a 'majority' that doesn't exist.

Feh.

well miss ya- yeeehaaawdist

Sorry for slipping into a bit of French. I am drafting something in that language and can't get it out of my head completely when writing my posts here. What I said is nothing to gripe about.

All the best people. See y'all in a few weeks' time :)

Ibn Allah:)

Sorry for pulling your leg. Just testing how much you know Arabic.

As for you and me, l'un ne peut fonctionner sans l'autre in making Muslim lives better.

And come out and elaborate on your proposed plan as you stated in your previous post on what we should do. We are all ears here.

To apolitical...

Welcome Chicken little. Don't worry the sky ain't falling apart yet or at any time soon unless you have been talking to John Hagee and company who claim to have a direct red phone hotline to the throne of the Lord who is sitting in heaven and the earth is his stool(big Guy ain't he chicken little!)

assalamu alaikum sister Victoria. God bless...

Ibn Allah?:)

Son of God? That is what you monicker means in Arabic. No Muslim would use that:)

Nice try:)

Apoliticallycorrect:

Of course. Julie would not know anything about Islam until and unless what she says fits with what you say and think eh :)

As far as I can read, hear and see, there is no "political correctness" in the On Faith threads on religion at all. Soooo......

The difference between a Terrorist and a Soldier is very simple, their country of origin, one comes from the “third world” and the other from the so called “First World”. Both of them Murder millions of people from the other side because they don’t share the same ideas and they were told to do so. The first one kills following religion, and the second one following politics.

Now here comes “Freedom” and by that first we have to clarify its limits which are very simple: My Freedom ends where yours starts. I may have an Idea and I am free to express it as long as it doesn’t hurt nobody’s feelings. Me as a Catholic I have the freedom to express MY religion, but I DON’T have the right to call anybody else’s religion a fake. If you want it to be logical, neither me or anybody else has Factual proof that what we are saying is the only and complete truth, we just believe that and that’s what Faith is all about.

I have the freedom to make a barbeque on my back yard, but I don’t have the right to disturb my neighbors, same thing applies to them.

You may think whatever you want, but in my humble opinion USA went to conquer Iraq to take out their oil and nothing more. Sadam Hussein was a mere excuse and they executed him for killing 124 persons. How many US Soldiers die and how many Arab people are killed by them each day because of “Presidents” orders?

On 9-11 we witnessed the horrors of terrorism and 5000 “innocent” people died. It is sad to say but none of us is Innocent if we don’t do anything to prevent what is happening right now. Democracy works by majorities, and if the majority of people want war, then we all are guilty of its horrors.

And to end with the main thing about this article, some people in this discussion board say that all Muslims are terrorists, stop and think about it, it would be the same as being in the Arabic side and saying that all Westerners are Soldiers or even worst, Murderers. Yes, some of them are and like I said before, all religions have extremists that are willing to die in “gods” name, like soldiers are for money to pay for their tuition.

Discrimination comes from ignorance and the lack of interest to learn about other ways of thinking.

Julie:

You do not know anything about Islam. You believe the Westernized politically correct version which is not really true Islam. Do you feel sorry for all the Children that get blown up by true Muslims with bombs strapped to their bodies in Israel? Do you care that every nation that has been run over by Islam is now a war zone. How blind does a person have to be to miss all this? Political Correctness must go before our nation falls. It is amazing that a nation with so much power cannot destroy the terrorists because of all the political correctness. Our children do not receive an education in school anymore. No, they are being indoctrinated by people like you. I am glad you have a heart for those who are treated unjustly but do not miss the truth when it is so crystal clear. Islam is evil. The Muslims want to take over the world for Allah. It only takes a cursory reading of the Qur'an, and honest look at the murderous life of Muhammad, and a look at the history of Islam. Everywhere it prevails there is violence, anger, and hatred.

mostly nicley put ibn alla but number 3 should be oppress women in CONTRADICITION to islamic teachings

as for not allowing sharia to take hold-

are you in america?

i watched congressional proceedings today (like every day)

im happy to inform everyone that the resolution passed to rename Ellis Island (by the staute of liberty- where many immigrants first hit the shores here- well- used to ) Bob Hope!

Giving renewed 'hope' (nopun intended- well- none elocuted either) to oppressed and undertrodden rich while male golfers all over america!
they exhibited their delirium by wearing unmatching tartan plaid pants and lime green scully caps-

i am flushed with renewed pride every day when i watch my government in action, and the penetrating issues they grapple with...

salaams and jazakalakhairum to the increasingly apporpriately named jihadist

ibn alla- that journey starts as always (as the increasingly apporpriately named jihadist reminds us with her moniker) within

To improve our image we should

1) Ask what we, as Muslims, can do to win the hearts of non-Muslims.

2) We should take a honest look at our religion and reform its defects.

3) We should not deal with imams and countries that oppress women in concert with Islamic teachings.

4) We should swear to uphold the US Constitution and not allow sharia to take hold.

My compliments to you Victoria - la seule blanche ayant une voix de Muslim, les uns contre les autres.

Salam and regards
Jihadist

Victoria !

Hello, hello!

The "Muslim truth squad" is in full swing here!
What would an On Faith Muslim panelist's thread be without them :)

My personal favourite - I'm sorry to say, the truth may hurt, but Islam is a false relgion, an evil cult. Love it:)

My second personal favourite - all those fellows bringing out Suras, Hadiths, the Prophet and instances of Muslim actions against fellow Muslims or non-Muslims overseas.

They don't see the irony of what they are doing as Christians here in the US and overseas it seems:)

Victoria,

So, how many Christians would it take to reconvert a female Irish American Muslim back?

Five rabid ranters on Islam and Muslims.

Actually, this is a very interesting thread. Three seperate realities here - Muslim, Christian, atheist.

Makes one recall of President Eisenhower talking about the military-industrial complex and one to think of coming up with silly new terms such as missionary mindset-faith based initiatives complex.

And Victoria,

You and Eboo are not responsible for nor accountable, nor answerable for what Muslims outside the US do or did not do. Every Muslim is responsible for his own actions, and every Muslim governments too.

You are not responsible for what the Taliban think and do, what the Sunnis and Shiites think and do in Iraq, nor what Hamas and Hezbollah think and do.

I find it admirable that you should undertake to explain Islam to your fellow Americans. A challenging undertaking considering some of your fellow Americans are prone to blame others for their ignorance, errors and mistakes. No sense of personal responsibility as reflected by Americans suing McDonald's for the hot scalding coffee they spilled on their laps. Or to sue cigarettes companies for cancer due to not stopping their addiction to smoking. Or blaming liquor for regrettable words and actions.

And I see that they shied away from eleborating their own dogmas to say their beliefs are better and the one and only "truth", "true faith" and true interpretation of God, and and to go on, again and again, why Islam is so evil and bad:)

Can I get anyone coffee, tea, a sixpack? You know, for another round of - I'm sorry to say so..., I know it hurts to say so..... I know the truth hurts....... Islam is a false religion....Muslims are in a satanic cult.....

Thank God, y'all who said Islam is a false religion do believe in God eh? God bless y'all.

I'll see y'all in hell. Then go to heaven with the houris around, which are not virgins actually, but purified souls:)

Glen -- Your fictional Jesus was a false Messiah.

Glen, why do you disagree with the pope?

Pope John Paul II on Islam

"We adore God and profess total submission to him. Thus, in a true sense, we can call one another brothers and sisters in faith in the one God,"

"Christians and Muslims generally we have understood each other badly. Sometimes in the past we have opposed each other and even exhausted ourselves in polemics and wars. I believe that God is calling us today to change our old habits. We have to respect each other and stimulate each other in good works upon the path indicated by God. In a world that desires unity and peace, but which experiences a thousand tensions and conflicts, believers should foster friendship and union among humanity and the people who comprise a single community on earth"

"May the hearts of Christians and Muslims turn to one another with feelings of brotherhood and friendship, so that the Almighty may bless us with the peace which heaven alone can give. To the One, Merciful God be praise and glory for ever. Amen."

Let me tell you as politely as I can: Your prophet Mohamed is a false prophet and your Sharia law is repressive. There I said it. Please don't be upset with me for telling the truth about Islam in this great free nation. I feel for you brother as your Islam tells you that I am being disrespectful and perhaps deserve to die. With all due respect I just don't agree with your ideology. I live in the USA so I can honestly tell you that your religion is full of hate and really a drag. Please don't be angry because I am only honestly and politely expressing my opinion. Thank you and God (not Allah) Bless.

HALOZCEL...Why don't you respect the Pope's opinion?

Pope John Paul II on Islam

"We adore God and profess total submission to him. Thus, in a true sense, we can call one another brothers and sisters in faith in the one God,"

"Christians and Muslims generally we have understood each other badly. Sometimes in the past we have opposed each other and even exhausted ourselves in polemics and wars. I believe that God is calling us today to change our old habits. We have to respect each other and stimulate each other in good works upon the path indicated by God. In a world that desires unity and peace, but which experiences a thousand tensions and conflicts, believers should foster friendship and union among humanity and the people who comprise a single community on earth"

"May the hearts of Christians and Muslims turn to one another with feelings of brotherhood and friendship, so that the Almighty may bless us with the peace which heaven alone can give. To the One, Merciful God be praise and glory for ever. Amen."

Julie,Dear Professor,welcome.

You say,we should try to be respectful of each other faith.
...man can scourge woman 4.34.shall we recpect this? or Timothy 2.12.

You say,they should be brought up with tolerance and with love.
so,shall we respect 9.73 and 5.51.

You say,please do not use this as a forum for speaking hatred against any religion.
In that case,shall we respect 8.12.

Ross, Pablo, Concerned Christian, etc, no offense but I trust the Pope's opinion more than yours...Or are you going to claim that you know more than the pope?

Pope John Paul II on Islam

"We adore God and profess total submission to him. Thus, in a true sense, we can call one another brothers and sisters in faith in the one God,"

"Christians and Muslims generally we have understood each other badly. Sometimes in the past we have opposed each other and even exhausted ourselves in polemics and wars. I believe that God is calling us today to change our old habits. We have to respect each other and stimulate each other in good works upon the path indicated by God. In a world that desires unity and peace, but which experiences a thousand tensions and conflicts, believers should foster friendship and union among humanity and the people who comprise a single community on earth"

"May the hearts of Christians and Muslims turn to one another with feelings of brotherhood and friendship, so that the Almighty may bless us with the peace which heaven alone can give. To the One, Merciful God be praise and glory for ever. Amen."

this is for you ross:

what good will it do to you if the Muslim lets say start doing what you think? while you are trying hard to point out and jumping from one topic to another avoiding all the questions? you want to change the muslim laws while on the other hand you christian wantto give approval to
homosexual to get married? very good ross you guys are just amazing.

Victoria wrote:
ROSS- you still havent provided any instances of a country that practices dhimmitude today-
youve given 3 examples of APOSTASY-

Please reread my posts, only the third case was about apostates. The family from malaysia were HINDUS who were helpless againt the sharia controlled government. The man accused for blasphemy in pakistan is/was (i'm not sure if he is still alive) a christian who again was helpless against the muslim authorities.

You are just trying to make excuses for the evil perpetrated by the sharia.

I'll tell you more about islamic countries, all countries having the sharia law implement the following
1. do not permit non muslim for standing in local election
2.do not permit non muslim to become the head of state or other major position like chief of armed forces.
3.Prevent non muslim men from marrying muslim women.
4. Non muslim marriage is automatically nullfied if one of the spouses becomes muslim and marries a muslim.
5. In case of a divorce the children go to the muslim parent.

Nearly all muslim coutries implement the above.

Do you find the above laws acceptable ?

JIHADIST- that is interesting that you brought up Mccarthy-
last night my husband and i watched the movie 'goodnight and good luck' about ed murrow's journalistic foray into mccarthist america-

he was a hateful little troll who played on peoples basest fears and insecurities
also a master of innuendo-

i see the same tactics used here

if you say something enough, (islam is a religio of hate for instance) and loud enough and long enough, people stop questioning whether it is true or not, and just believe what theyre programmed

my reccomendation to everyone here-
turn off fox news- watch bbc once in a while
peace

Pablo- that question was to A HANDLER in repsonse to their complaint that muslims are silent- not you dear-
i have a habit of collecting ideas and writing in my head and then making an answer assuming that people will know its addressed to them-
ill try to be more conscious

ROSS- you still havent provided any instances of a country that practices dhimmitude today-
youve given 3 examples of APOSTASY-

you know well that leaving islam (apostasy) is what a muslim does and the consequent extreme over reactions youve posted

dhimmis arent muslims but people of other faiths living in muslim countries under protected status (for instance dhimmis dont have to serve in the military)

so i ask again- in reference to DHIMMIS not APOSTATES-
where this happens today

DEB- As you specifically told me before you are a hindu- have you switched or are you categorizing hinduism as deism now?
just curious

also in respect to the complaint of A HANDLER again- i told him to google that because he was saying there are NO MULSIMS RESPONDING to violence

whoever said jihadist should change her name-
please dont blame her name choice because you dont know the meaning of jihad-
even that awful wikipedia will give you a summary of it-
you can even look back at my post before the long one and find a definition

no one has to worry that jihadist wants me to 'stay a muslim' there is no person on this planet who can do that- i stay a muslim from conscious choice

well- like always- the same people see a muslim topic and show up to spread their prejudice-

ive been a fixture on these boards since its inception last november-

every muslim panelists question invariably degenerates into islamophobes taking over and spewing hate of islam and muslims

i think it rather proves the point of discrimination against muslims most decidedly-

i do have one complaint though-
i think it bad manners-

i have never once gone to an atheist or christian or jewish or wiccan site and denigrated their beliefs or belittled or outright hated them-

its just bad manners, but since the message is overwhelmingly slanderous i guess manners arent at the top of the list-

just an observation

i do agree with jihadist on one thing-

chrsitians always feel compelled to 'convinve' other of the rightness of their beliefs-

there is a certain desparation in that- and i also have to wonder-

who are you trying to convince?

others or yourself?

peace all

America's racist past is fast catching up with her again. For years America focused her hatred towards Black American's. Now America has a new focus for their hatred, Muslims world-wide. America spends their time hating one group or another all for the same reason, they do not look like US.

America has some learning yet to accomplish as America still refuese to accept their place in history of slavery and racism!

To understand the present, look at America's past. To understand the future look at America's present. hatred for minorities from past, to present, leading into the future.

America is still racist and will remains so, until American's stand up and have no more of it, racism and prejudice. Fighting any opportunity for equality is the American way. Capitalism!

BGONE,

Give us a break!!! Mormons are taking over the world? Maybe on Venus.

Add some common sense to The Church of Latter Day Saints formation and its foundations crumble to the ground.

e.g. The Book of Mormon, provided an account of an Israelite prophet, Lehi, who was commanded by God in 600 B.C. to lead a small group of people to the American continent. It also recorded the appearance of Christ, after his Resurrection, to the people in America. Early Mormonism held that there would be a literal gathering of Israel to the United States and that Zion would be built upon the American continent."

Lehi another in the long line of mythical prophets and the Book of Mormon another book authenicating itself.

I dare say a Catholic might be a bit discriminated against in Salt Lake City!!!

Julie you wrote:

"1 billion Muslims with those terrorists who commit violence in the name of Islam."

I respect your true intentions and your feelings in your entire post whole heartedly, your this statement somewhat bothers me my question is a simple one: as a professor would you kindly give us the defination of a terrorist? who can be labelled terrorist? are there terrorists who commit violence in the name of Christianity or judaism or hinduism?

I am a professor who studies political Islam. I have been reading the comments posted on this website for a few weeks now and I have felt very upset. There is a real tendency to take small facts about Islam and use them to condemn the faith on whole. In studying Islam, as with all religions, we must study the religious texts in their historical contexts.

I think we should all try to be respectful of each other's faiths. One can believe passionately in their own faith. One can have negative feelings about Islam. However, one should not disrespect Islam by slamming its prophets or conflating 1 billion Muslims with those terrorists who commit violence in the name of Islam.

I feel great sadness for those children who are called "terrorist" or "osama" by their classmates and beaten up. It would break my heart if my children were beat up because they are Jews. Our children must not be brought up to hate. They should be brought up with tolerance and with a love of learning.

There are lots of interesting scholars who blog on this website and make interesting arguments that could be fuel for compelling discussions. Please do not use this as a forum for speaking hatred against any religion.

I was born a Jew. Now I do not want to be a Jew. But, I am now just a Joktanic HEBREW and Not a Pelig Hebrew. As an ex International Traveler I traveled the whole world and studied Christianity, Islam, Hindu & Budha faiths. I admitt that i only read their scriptures in English. Yet I decided that ALL of these faiths can be now called ancient PRE-APOCOLYPTIC belief SYSTEMS. I have a NEW RELIGION, I have ECLAT (Meaning "A brilliance Bursting Forth"). I bekieve in the FLASH first and Not the BIG BANG. We live in TRANSFINITY (reality) and we came from the MAGMATRICULATION and that: LIFE IS A MIRACLE & THER IS NOTHING-SINFULL ABOUT IT contrary to what the NOVELISTs and their bennefactors have transcribed, interpreted nor fiated as if from G-d ITSELF. Note: As an ECLATARIAN, ECLAT (G-d, Lord, Almighty, Father, mother etc...) is neither a He nor a She. And I now know, as by being in a Carbon Form creature, that WE NEVER DIE! :-) Praise Eclat in my HOLY HEART BEAT. Sholom!

Frank Collins wrote:

" they have to learn that in the west we can actually get a copy of the koran and read it."

Frank frankly are you guys claiming that you have read the Qoran "really", why dont you first go and read the BIBLE first and try to understand it in its full entirity and straighten your own life before you go on read something in a foreign language and claiming you understand better than the muslims, this time your illusion did not work.

deb chatterjee wrote:

Most Muslim scholars (translators) have stated they knew Arabic and actually studied it in madrassas. So are these translators lying ? If Allah's timeless message can be subject to whims and fancies of the translator, then Allah's followers (Muslim translators) have taken him for a ride. Thus, Islam is a false religion - as its message to humanity depends on who is translating.

my question is was the original language of the BIBLE english or was it translated from someother language and modified as per your own suitness.

it looks like those islamics on the board defend their religion by denying that the koran says what it says. you get people like that from islam. they call everyone liars but cant point to a lie. they tell you that you are speaking out of context but when you give them a quote they deny it. they have to learn that in the west we can actually get a copy of the koran and read it.

It is a shame that we have a moderator who keeps allowing dirt from other posters go free against Islam, but does not have balls to confront the truth so he deleted my posting that had some truth in it and some bitter questions who was hard to handle, MR MODERATOR if you are man enough then put my deleted post on the board.

You let christians a blank check to write anything about ISLAM and even let them demanded the validity of the Relegion, while on the other hand you deleted my post when I demanded the validity of their faith. This proved that you and your panelists especially the Christians are nothing but the fake and you are guilty of creating the Clash of Civilizations and stoping the light of the Lord Almighty to come through, Allah knows how to deal with people like and from my side why dont you guys put some skirt and blouse and live like drags then call yourselves relegious inquiring mind.

JAMES BUCHANAN:

Your constitutionaly right to "spit" on beliefs will be all different when the constitution is replaced by sacred scriptures. You know, the way it was before the constitution, a little fire to the feet, the rack, no spitting on beliefs for sure. The issue to be decided is which sacred scripture, Bible, Qu'ran, or Book of Mormon will win out and become the law of the land.

Muslims are "come lately" and have a bit catching up to do. Christians must be benevolent and let them into this Christian nation where the Bible now struggles to be accepted as the constitution's replacment. Look out for those Mormons for they're coming up fast. It's the rack for spitters, just you wait and see.

Victoria,

You have not answered. Do you believe that the whole world should and will be converted to Islam one day?

Pablo

Mo,

I see you have dodged the issue. You sound like you have been programmed. A big following is not proof of truth. Many followed Hitler. Let’s think through these issues together.

Pablo

People hear something in their dreams--a psychedelic experience.

People hear something in their dreams--a psychedelic experience.

Anonymous,

You have not addressed the issue of the Trinity and whether or not the scriptures teach that there are three persons in the scripture who are called God and that these three persons are one. This would not do in formal debate, address the issue.

Why does God use plural personal pronouns when speaking of Himself making man in His image, male and female He created them?

Is woman included as being made in the image of God in the Muslim way of thinking? If she is how is that consistent with God being an absolute one?

Did God have to create another being to experience a relationship of one or is the man and woman relationship of one flesh a reflection of God's relationship within the three persons of the Trinity?

The usage of the Hebrew word “eXad” in the Shema does not mean absolute one in fact it is used throughout the scripture as a united one. For example, Genesis 2:24 when God said, "They shall be one flesh" is a great example of “eXad.”

By they way what should one call you?

Pablo

Historian -- Thanks for your post, in which you state that "All statements in the Hebrew Bible and in rabbinic literature which use anthropomorphism are held to be linguistic conceits or metaphors, as it would otherwise be impossible to talk about God at all." Anthropomorphism includes the use by God of human speech. Are the instances in the Bible where God communicates with people by speaking to them in their language accurate accounts of their communications, or are these conversations metaphorical? What do you think of the belief that many have that these conversations are accurately portrayed in the Bible?

Victoria,
Sorry again, I misspelt your name.

Victora,

Sorry, the previous post was mine, I typed your name in the wrong text box.

Victoria wrote:
as ive asked you before- where on the planet earth is this is practice today?

I've provided examples of dhimmitude of minorities from 3 islamic countries. These persecution was not ordered by some radical group but by the sharia based government, so please think again before you condemn these governments as "un islamic".

In these cases how does it translate to protection ?

I've lived/visited a few countries in the middle east and have experienced dhimmitude firsthand. Being an Indian I'm aware of how minorities are treated from neighbouring islamic countries like pakistan and bangladesh. Even today the bangla writer Taslima Nasreen has to live in hiding because of a fatwa issued by the religious authorities of bangladesh just for writing a book called Lajja (shame) that described the plight of the hindu minority in her country.

Returning to the topic:

Most contemporary Catholics are not discriminated against unless they live in an Islamic or Communist controlled country.

We Catholics do receive criticism and rightly so for our belief in original sin, limbo, trinity, confessing sins to a sinning priest, and the 24/7 blood sacrifice of Jesus.

God's gifts of common sense and reasoning are slowly eroding these Dark Age concepts.

Victoria,

Here's one from afghanistan.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4865818.stm

----------------------------------------

Hopes and fears of Afghan Christians
By Tom Coghlan
Kabul

Afghan Abdul Rahman converted to Christianity 16 years ago
For Afghanistan's tiny Christian community, a community certainly in the hundreds and probably the thousands, the Abdul Rahman case has brought both fear and hope.
Mr Rahman is starting a new life in Italy after his trial in Afghanistan for converting from Islam collapsed. He faced the death penalty if he had been found guilty.

In a house in Kabul, one of the city's Christian community described the ambivalent position they now find themselves in.

The world now knows more of their existence.

International pressure for increased religious tolerance, might, they hope, reduce their current vulnerability.

'Civil rights'

But the Rahman case has also pushed the question of Islamic apostasy to the fore in Afghanistan and focused the attention of the country's conservative religious parties.

"This case has shown that there are Christians in Afghanistan and that they have civil rights that should be respected," said the man.

"In Afghanistan we Christians have nothing to do with politics. We love and respect everyone. We love and respect even our enemies, however they punish us."

There is much disillusionment - people used to look to communism, now they look increasingly to Christianity

British-based Christian

He was accompanied by other Afghan Christians and spoke on their behalf. The man will not be photographed and asked that details that might help identify him be kept to a minimum.

The Christian community live with the threat of official harassment and attack by extremists. There have been gun and grenade attacks against churches in neighbouring Pakistan.

"There is a very large threat against me," he said. "We hope that God will care for us."

Reasons for conversion

But despite the reported hardline rhetoric of Afghan clerics during the Rahman case the Christian claims that many Muslim friends regard his conversion as a private matter.

There is no clear-cut text in the Koran calling apostates to be killed

"Most of my friends know that I am a Christian," he said. "I have many friends who are mullahs and maulvis.

"Some of them say they like me more these days. Before I was a liar, I was cheating people and many other things. I don't do that now."

The reasons for conversion in such a potentially hostile environment are of course varied and personal.

I also met one British Christian with longstanding links to the Afghan Christian underground, although not linked to the Afghan Christian interviewed for this article.

The British man argues that the actions of political groups during Afghanistan's civil war years and the harsh doctrine of the Taleban were factors in the conversion of some Afghans.

"There is much disillusionment," he says. "People used to look to communism, now they look increasingly to Christianity."

The British man added that the compassionate actions of Christian-based aid agencies during the civil war and Taleban era in Afghanistan had impressed many Afghans. He denied that any aid agencies were involved in proselytization.

The Afghan Christian interviewed by the BBC was quick to point out that his own conversion took place before Afghanistan's civil war began. And he was also keen to stress his respect for Islam and Islamic beliefs.

I am very happy with my life and I see other Christians here very happy too

Christian convert

But he said: "Some political groups use Islam as a vehicle for their advantage; to get power and to keep power. They are still using it.

"These groups are discredited in Afghan society. They have used Abdul Rahman to promote their power. Afghans feel at ease with Christians. It is only a few political groups who don't."

He declines to detail the reasons for his own conversion but stresses the shared heritage of Islam and Christianity.

"When I read the second section of the Koran, the one which deals with the birth of Jesus Christ to Mary, it affected me in a very profound way," he said.

"My purpose is only to worship God. I find from this religion that I can."

Long-established Christianity

Like the Christian community in neighbouring Pakistan, where the minority numbers some millions, Afghanistan's Christians say that a Christian community has always survived in their country.

Many Afghans were unhappy with the dismissal of the Rahman case
"One of Christ's disciples came to Afghanistan," said the man. "When Islam came the churches were destroyed but some Christians still practised.

There are Christians whose families have been Christian for many generations, but most converted recently," he said.

In Pakistan, Christians have pointed to the 1935 discovery of the so-called Taxila Cross, an apparent Christian symbol from the 2nd Century, as evidence to support accounts that St Thomas established a Christian community in South Asia.

This would counter the idea that Christianity in the region is only a recent product of British colonial influence.

Proof of a long-established Christian community in Afghanistan might confer a measure of legitimacy to Afghan Christians similar to that enjoyed by the country's small Sikh and Hindu communities.

"I am very happy with my life and I see other Christians here very happy too," claimed the Christian convert.

"In the future, what God wants will happen. But Christians are always with God and if we are killed we go to God."

----------------------------------------

Victoria,

Here's another example from pakistan:

----------------------------------------------
Pakistan blasphemy case death sentence

A court in Pakistani city of Lahore has sentenced a man to death for blasphemy.

Prosecution said the man, Anwar Kenneth - a Christian in his forties - had claimed to be an incarnation of Jesus Christ and described Islam as a fake religion.

Mr Kenneth had refused to accept legal assistance and pleaded guilty to the blasphemy charges.

Christian rights workers say Mr Kenneth had a history of psychiatric problems and should have been medically examined before his case was considered by the court.

Human rights organisations in Pakistan have been demanding the repeal of the blasphemy laws, which, they say, were largely targeted at religious minorities which together constitute about three-per-cent of the population.

-----------------------------------------

Victoria,

Here an example of how muslims treat minorities even in a moderate muslim country like malaysia. THEY DO NOT EVEN LEAVE THE DEAD ALONE.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4563452.stm

----------------------------------------------

Muslim burial for Malaysian hero

Mr Moorthy's widow was in tears after Wednesday's ruling. A Malaysian mountaineering hero will be buried as a Muslim, against the wishes of his Hindu wife, who denied he had converted to Islam before his death.
The decision follows a High Court ruling that it cannot override the country's Islamic courts in matters of religious conversion.

An Islamic court had said the man, M Moorthy, had become a Muslim last year.

Lawyers say the case highlights problems faced by non-Muslims dealing with Malaysia's Islamic justice system.

"So much for good interracial relations," Haris Mohamad Ibrahim, a lawyer representing Malaysia's Bar Council, told The Associated Press.

"The judge has just told the widow and her family to go back and leave the body of their beloved to be buried by strangers."

Coma

M Moorthy, 36, was a Hindu when he became a national hero in 1997 as a member of the first Malaysian expedition to conquer Mount Everest.

But when he died a week ago family supporters and state Islamic officials jostled one another at the mortuary as each tried to claim his body.

An Islamic Sharia court subsequently upheld a claim by his former colleagues in the army that he had become a Muslim last year.

However his family, who want him to have a Hindu funeral, were not allowed to appear before the court to dispute his conversion because they are not Muslims.

The family went to the civil court and argued that Mr Moorthy was a practising Hindu right up to a recent accident when he fell from his wheelchair and lapsed into a coma.

They say he was even interviewed for local television two months ago about his preparations for the Hindu festival of Diwali.

But the High Court agreed with government lawyers who argued the civil court had no jurisdiction.

Lawyers for the dead man's relatives say the ruling leaves non-Muslims little protection in family disputes considered under Islamic law.

Most Malaysians are Muslim but the country's constitution guarantees freedom of worship for all.

----------------------------------------------

try to think of it this way. you are part of a religion that says not to take kew, christians, or anyone else not islamic as friends or co-workers, ypu are part of a religion that says that you can make them all convert or kill them, SLOWLY. you are part of a religion that has been at war since 629 ad when islam started murdering all of the above - before they even knew about islam. you are part of a religion that has at its core the assertion that it can force islam on those who do not want it and also kill those who chose not to continue with it, you have spread by violence into north arficia where you religion supports genocide and slavery and the sex slave trade. but you have mastered the POOR ME approach to everything. in other words that which you do to each other and to those not islamic is just fine if it you that is doing it, but it is an affront to islam if anyone does it to you. the world is awake. we have read your koran and know that it is the blueprint death and destruciton the same as mein kampf was the blueprint for the same for hitler.

Alekz:
The money I give to the Catholic church goes to The Vatican, and thus it transforms itself to Euros, then the Dollar Looses power.

But then the EU and the rest of the world are forced to bow before the dollar hegemony when they have to purchase their oil only using US Dollars.
The reason Iraq was attacked was because it dared to price his oil in euro thus reducing the value of the dollar. Iran has done the same now.

Dear Mr. Patel

I am a Christian Catholic and I say we do suffer from the same discrimination that Muslim people have, but only on a lighter level. We have been stigmatized to have pederastic preaches and a lot of horrible things on media.

And even like that, I wouldn't be close to your feelings.

But let me tell you this, Alajh (YES at Holly Land we Muslims, Jewish and Christians in general call God Alajh, so I feel it is ok to call it the same here) doesn't ever leave us alone, somehow He wanted us to be born on a particular religion and when we grow and mature, we are able to decide wether we want it or not.

The problem now comes when we speak about Churches, and that they are operated by humans and that those humans have some kind of predilections for their specific ideas and as leaders they can influence their people to follow those ideas "in the name of god".

Now as if that wasn't enough we now speak about politics and Country needs and with that, Economy. Where does this lead us?

The money I give to the Catholic church goes to The Vatican, and thus it transforms itself to Euros, then the Dollar Looses power. The money Jewish give, some part goes to Israel and therefore transforming itself into another currency. Same thing aplies to Muslims... Why doesn't it apply to other Christian non Catholic Churches? Because their base is within the US. Now everybody make their own asumptions.

Each and every Religion has a Fundamentalist Wing which leads some believers to extremes. Christianism does, even in the particular case of Catholics, we do have a fundamentalist wing. Judaism does have it too.

From the very little I've been spoken about the Koran, I know that it speaks about Love an Compasion in a very nice manner, in its nature Islam is a very peaceful Religion. Very very strict, but it searches the same thing Internal Peace.

I may believe that my Religion is the "Right One", but I still respect yours. And we should all to.

About freedom of beliefs, well we all know a little bit about Politics and that sometimes Politics is like a Religion that for strategic measures, it shouldn't accept other ways of thinking than theirs.

Now I must tell you, Allways be happy of your Beliefs, never deny them and teach them to your Baby, make him (or her) a good person, proud of his or her history. As long as you teach to love and respect others any religion is ok.

Basic Jewish view of God

Judaism is based on a strict unitarian monotheism, the belief in one God. The prayer par excellence in terms of defining God is the Shema Yisrael, "Hear O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One", also translated as "Hear O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is unique/alone."

God is non-physical, non-corporeal, and eternal. A corollary belief is that God is utterly unlike man, and can in no way be considered anthropomorphic. All statements in the Hebrew Bible and in rabbinic literature which use anthropomorphism are held to be linguistic conceits or metaphors, as it would otherwise be impossible to talk about God at all

The idea of God as a duality or trinity is heretical - it is considered akin to polytheism. "[God], the Cause of all, is one. This does not mean one as in one of a pair, nor one like a species (which encompasses many individuals), nor one as in an object that is made up of many elements, nor as a single simple object that is infinitely divisible. Rather, God is a unity unlike any other possible unity.

While Jews hold that duality or trinity conception of God is incorrect, non-Jews who hold such beliefs are not held culpable

Thank you Ed for the posts you wrote. It's so humbling to read them in full. You are truly a gentle soul. I have been trying to go to a synagogue for some time now, but I keep missing the time for the service on the Sabbath. A couple of weeks ago I saw a Jewish man, the yarmulka gave him away, in the store and so I walked to him and introduced myself as a Muslim; and we talked for a little while; I never done that before and it felt good. I don't know but I feel some kind of kinship towards my cousins and my fellow Jewish people inspite of all the politics going on in the Middle East...
may God bless you and have mercy on your soul.

Shalom

THE CHALLENGE.
to those who doubt the creator lord ,let them creat a mosquto.

to those who doubt the word of the creator lord(quran)let them bring one verse like it.

to those who doubt muhamed the last and final messenger to mankind,he started as one man now its 1.5 BILLION man.1428 years and still rolling,increasing ,booming,and challengeing.

the CHALLENGE is good till the last day.go for it if you have the brain ,go for it if you have the guts.

I’m Jewish; my background / introduction is the sixth entry (March 15) at
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/editorsinbox/2007/02/06/share_your_faith_story.html

As a Jew, I’m well aware that during many centuries the Jews have been treated better as a minority in Muslim countries than in Christian countries. I found the review of some past problems above by “Historian” fascinating, but it doesn’t change my view on that. Let’s not review here tales of Christian expulsions of Jews (and worse.) The issue is not what happened in the past, but what ought to happen in the future.

Very few non-Muslim Americans have ever visited a mosque. I recommend it. While occasionally the sermon (the Friday afternoon sermon, or “Khutbah”) is on a fine point in the Koran that I don’t have the background for, several have been among the best sermons I’ve heard, and I’d have been happy to have heard them in my synagogue or my wife’s church (I admit that one Khutbah sounded too much like something out of St. Augustine for my Jewish tastes!). The “Social Issues” discussion group is not unlike the corresponding class in my synagogue, and has been happy to have a Jewish voice participating..

Yes, you’ll encounter extreme nationalists and religious extremists in many countries, many religions, and many historical periods. A remarkable feature of the United States is that it has allowed a great many religious beliefs to flourish and most of them have found ways to coexist respectfully with one another and even to learn and benefit from one another. And that is the sort of religion I find in my neighborhood mosque in Memphis, Tennessee. It has a great many immigrants among its members, and I find that it is doing a lot of the same “Americanization” work that my grandparents’ synagogues did a century ago. It is thrilling to me, as an American, to hear a Muslim immigrant to the US explaining to a roomful of others - “We are Americans now. This is our country. If any of don’t feel like Americans, your children will. You have to raise them to live as Americans.”

Muslim minorities have gotten along very well in many places in the world in the past, said the Muslim speaking to Muslims. Learn about the American political system, learn the way Americans make decisions. It was a talk any American should have been happy with. But this sort of moderate Muslim voice - as widespread as it is in this country - isn’t “news”. There are moderate and informative web sites out there - look at, say, //isna.com . It certainly does address the problem of anti-Muslim sentiment, but much of what is there (or in their magazine) is not very different from the web sites or magazines of the Presbyterians or the Methodists, or the Reform Jews. Muslims face the same everyday problems, made worse by the hostility they sometimes encounter.

Back on September 11, 2001, Osama bin Laden seemed to have one public demand; a war between Islam and the West. Unfortunately, George Bush decided to accede to that demand. Some of the purveyors of anti-Muslim sentiment in this discussion seem to be determined to help bin Laden along. One cure is for us all to learn more about Islam: not the Islam of the fear-mongers, or of tenth-century Arabia, or of the esoteric theologians, but the practical day-to-day Islam of our neighbors, our American Muslims.

Edward Ordman

Deist Deb
Please forgive me and accept my sincere apology. No one should ever mistakes a deist for a Christian. I turned into the biggot these guys are...

Pablo,

"Food for thought":

Every Christian has his/her own interpretation of the Word of God. Four different books, at least five auxiliary books/epistles, competing theologians/sects/protests, and competing stories just in the original set followed by translations and embellishments followed by countless interpretations, hidden codes and raptures. And you are trying to prove the Trinity from such a mess??

IMHO, God needs to have another visit to a mountaintop to get the mess cleaned up.
Of course, there are the other religions that have the same God but different authentic Words. Very strange that our God could create such confusion don't you think? The whole cacophony smells of politics and economics.

Arabic,

So God only loves people who speak Arabic. I do not think so. God loves all people and He speaks all languages.

Pablo

Pablo,

You wrote: “Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. . . ” (Genesis 1:26). I was not going to bust your bubble but what a he**.
Basically you are implying that God in the TANAK is made up of more than one person. You are using a Hebrew bible which was written by the Jews for the Jews. Why don’t you ask them if your advanced scientific understanding of God is true for they never, never believed God is made up of many persons. The plural you imply is the plural of respect. It’s the language and the idiom of the Semitic language. It never meant plural of numbers. Here is an example from the Quran:

15: 23. And verily, it is We Who give life, and Who give death: it is We Who remain inheritors (after all else passes away). 24. To Us are known those of you who hasten forward, and those who lag behind. 25. Assuredly it is thy Lord Who will gather them together: for He is perfect in Wisdom and Knowledge. 26. We created man from sounding clay, from mud molded into shape;

and in:

50:37. Verily in this is a Message for any that has a heart and understanding or who gives ear and earnestly witnesses (the truth). 38. We created the heavens and the earth and all between them in Six Days, nor did any sense of weariness touch Us. 39. Bear, then, with patience, all that they say, and celebrate the praises of thy Lord, before the rising of the sun and before (its) setting. 40. And during part of the night, (also,) celebrate His praises, and (so likewise) after the postures of adoration. 41. And listen for the Day when the Caller will call out from a place quiet near,- 42. The Day when they will hear a (mighty) Blast in (very) truth: that will be the Day of Resurrection. 43. Verily it is We Who give Life and Death; and to Us is the Final Goal- 44. The Day when the Earth will be rent asunder, from (men) hurrying out: that will be a gathering together,- quite easy for Us. 45. We know best what they say; and thou art not one to overawe them by force. So admonish with the Qur'an such as fear My Warning!

No one ever accused the Muslims of ever worshiping a multi-person God. So get off of it already. You only show your lack of understanding when you keep using the same verses over and over again to prove your pagan trintiy.

Arabic wrote:

"The language of Arabic is so rich that any translator can translate certain verses that fit their motives...So unless you actually know Arabic, I don't trust anybody's post on this blog."

Most Muslim scholars (translators) have stated they knew Arabic and actually studied it in madrassas. So are these translators lying ? If Allah's timeless message can be subject to whims and fancies of the translator, then Allah's followers (Muslim translators) have taken him for a ride. Thus, Islam is a false religion - as its message to humanity depends on who is translating.

Hannabal wrote:

"Deb,

I am still waiting to see a verse from you that compares with what I have stated; and please don’t tell me you can’t come up with on measly verse from sixty six books and thousands of verses in the good book."

Who cares ? I am not a Christian, but a deist. The point you don't seem to get is that Islam and US Constitituon (Bill of Rights) are mutually annihilatory. Why do I need to quote some antiquated/obscurantist verse to compare against Islam - such as Quran [009:029] to what end ? Are you now going to change your tactic to state that US Constitution (Bill of Rights) is inferior to the barbaric system in the Sharia ?

And yet again:

"What a difference between the theology of man and God’s word. It's like night and day"

So what ? How does that explain why Eboo Patel thinks Muslims are discriminated in USA ? Get real, man !

All the people who want to insult Islam in favor of Christianity, look to the Pope...

Pope John Paul II on Islam

"We adore God and profess total submission to him. Thus, in a true sense, we can call one another brothers and sisters in faith in the one God,"

"Christians and Muslims generally we have understood each other badly. Sometimes in the past we have opposed each other and even exhausted ourselves in polemics and wars. I believe that God is calling us today to change our old habits. We have to respect each other and stimulate each other in good works upon the path indicated by God. In a world that desires unity and peace, but which experiences a thousand tensions and conflicts, believers should foster friendship and union among humanity and the people who comprise a single community on earth"

"May the hearts of Christians and Muslims turn to one another with feelings of brotherhood and friendship, so that the Almighty may bless us with the peace which heaven alone can give. To the One, Merciful God be praise and glory for ever. Amen."

You guys can't claim that you know more about Christianity than the Pope!

All those who are quoting the Qur'aan, how many of you actually know Arabic?

The language of Arabic is so rich that any translator can translate certain verses that fit their motives...So unless you actually know Arabic, I don't trust anybody's post on this blog.

John 3:13 No one has gone up to heaven except the Son of Man(what about Elijah and Enoch?), who came down from there. 14And the Son of Man must be lifted up, just as that metal snake was lifted up by Moses in the desert. [a] 15Then everyone who has faith in the Son of Man will have eternal life. 16God loved the people of this world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who has faith in him will have eternal life and never really die. 17God did not send his Son into the world to condemn its people. He sent him to save them! 18No one who has faith in God's Son will be condemned. But everyone who doesn't have faith in him has already been condemned for not having faith in God's only Son.

How about the people that never heard of Jesus or the ones that the missionaries have done a terribly bad job at convincing given the absurdity of the dogma.

According to John any one who doesn’t believe Jesus is God’s son is already damned caput, tko’ed and done away with here on this earth. The result is of course total disregard for the life of the other. To the born again Christian life of the unbeliever is sacred no more for he is already damned and destined for the hell fire. He is numb to the suffering of the unbeliever. That’s the reason countless number of people have their lives snuffed away using this theology of “love.” The Native Americans will tell you about how they were treated like savages and almost gone extinct and their culture done away with and forced to convert or die at the hands of their loving Christians masters. They will tell you about how their land was forcibly taken away from them at the point of the gun and forced to live in ghettos and reservations and about their kids being forced to attend bible schools to brainwash them. The same happened to the aborigines in Australia and the list of atrocities goes on and on all over the world.

Compare this with the following in the Quran:

22.17 Those who believe (in the Qur’an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians, Christians, Magians, and Polytheists,- God will judge between them on the Day of Judgment: for God is witness of all things.

We Muslims do not judge and we do not try to play God here on earth. We leave that to our maker. Here is a nugget you will not find in the book of John or in the rest of the good book.

5:48. To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what God hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee. To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way. If God had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to God. It is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute.
Plain and simple and to the point I might add. No dogmas and no hair splitting theology. I like that in Islam where it appeals to the inner being of man and his common sense.

Deb,

I am still waiting to see a verse from you that compares with what I have stated; and please don’t tell me you can’t come up with on measly verse from sixty six books and thousands of verses in the good book.

But the essence of Islam is this:

2:177. It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces Towards east or West; but it is righteousness- to believe in God and the Last Day, and the Angels, and the Book, and the Messengers; to spend of your substance, out of love for Him, for your kin, for orphans, for the needy, for the wayfarer, for those who ask, and for the ransom of slaves; to be steadfast in prayer, and practice regular charity; to fulfill the contracts which ye have made; and to be firm and patient, in pain (or suffering) and adversity, and throughout all periods of panic. Such are the people of truth, the God fearing.

And :

002.132 And this was the legacy that Abraham left to his sons, and so did Jacob; "Oh my sons! God has chosen the Faith for you; then die not except in the Faith of submission(to God)." 2.133 Were you witnesses when death appeared before Jacob? Behold, he said to his sons: "What will you worship after me?" They said: "We shall worship your god and the god of your fathers, of Abraham, Isma’il and Isaac,- the one (True) god: To Him we bow submission." 2.134 That was a people that have passed away. They shall reap the fruit of what they did, and you of what you do! Of their merits there is no question in your case! 2.135 They say: "Become Jews or Christians if you would be guided (To salvation)." Say thou: "Nay! (I would rather) the Religion of Abraham the True, and he joined not gods with God." 2.136 Say ye: "We believe in God, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Isma’il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) prophets from their Lord: We make no difference between one and another of them: And we bow to God in submission." 2.137 So if they believe as you believe, they are indeed on the right path; but if they turn back, it is they who are in schism; but God will suffice you as against them, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing.

Compare that to John 3:18.
What a difference between the theology of man and God’s word. It's like night and day.

Jihadist,

Your soul is yours to save.

Simply admit that the Koran is not god-inspired. That it was written by some militaristic and women-hating scribe(s) who plagiarized the OT and NT, two other "good" books that have their own problems with myths, guilt trips and embellishments. Bottom line you should take the best from all the "good" books and become "MultiFaithed". And fear not, there is no religion in Heaven.

Anonymous,

Lets roll with one question at a time. We will start with the trinity as I have laid out above.

Pablo

Dear Jihadist,

I have laid out the proof for the Trinity and I have addressed the Muslim claim of the absolute oneness of God. All I have received in response is unqualified statements and name calling. In other words I have not found a Muslim who wants to really consider these things. I also have not received a satisfactory answer to why we Christians and Jews should believe Muhammad had revelations from God that corrects the Bible? Muslims say they believe in the Old Testament and the Prophets yet they doubt that God has the ability to keep His word pure and claim that it has been corrupted. Please let’s talk about these things with the formal rules of debate. I challenge all Muslims to prove their case. I challenge all Muslims prove that the Bible is corrupted. I challenge all Muslims to a debate on the nature of God.

Debate on the Trinity

“Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. . . ” (Genesis 1:26).

“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27).

Notice that verse 27 includes both male and female as being made in the image of God. I submit to you that being made in the image of God includes the relational aspect of God. That is God has always been a God of relationship because He has always existed in three persons who are united as one in a relationship of one. I believe that being made in the image of God includes both male and female. Notice, God speaking in verse 26 says “Let us.” Let us do what? “make man in OUR own image. Man and woman are created in the image of God. The first man and woman were created as “one flesh.” Being created in the image of God includes two people who are one.

Questions
In Christianity Man and Woman are both made in the image of God and their relationship of one is part of being made in the image of God. In other words God’s image is most clearly seen in the man and woman relationship of one.
In Islam does God have to create another person to have a relationship of love with someone?

Why does God use plural personal pronouns when speaking of His creative act of making Man and Woman in His own image?

Pablo

" Somehow, my Muslim baby will look like Osama bin Laden to millions of Americans."

- i don't see this conclusion properly supported; rather, its the specious backbone of a rather specious blog. You seem to -want- to be offended, to take the offense of others and wear it as a badge. i wonder if your panice attacks are real, or the hyperbolic machination of someone trying to make their point?

Anonymous wrote:

"If Jesus is God, why did Stephen see two individuals in heaven?"

Simply because Stephen was reading the posts by Anonymous.

It's truly that simple.

Victoria wrote:

"google islam- and any subject you can think of-
moderates- 911 - response to violence- anything-
read the voluminous voices of muslims"

So, now Islam needs to be noodled and googled ? The Quran (as one reads in the English translations by Abdulah Yusuf Ali) are all meaningless ?

The false doctrine of the Trinity is absurd and my following post will prove that.

Let’s look at the doctrine of the Trinity through 51 questions and we will readily see that it is truly absurd and false if we try an answer these questions. It does NOT stand up to scrutiny. Check your own Bibles with respect the scriptures mentioned in many of the questions and seriously think on the others; be like the Boerns at Acts 17:11, “Now these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of the mind, examining the Scriptures daily, whether these things were so.” (American Standard Version; ASV) and only accept sound doctrine in keeping with the admonishment given at Titus 2:1, “But speak thou the things which befit the sound doctrine” (ASV):

1. If belief in the Trinity is so important to our salvation why isn't the word "Trinity", or the concept of three being one found in the Bible?
2. Why didn't the apostles and early Christians believe in the Trinity? (If you say they did, prove it from the Scriptures or quotations from one of the ante-Nicene Fathers before 200 AD.)
3. Since the Trinity was so contrary to the Jewish belief in God, why didn't Jesus and his apostles expend considerable time and effort in teaching and stressing the Trinity so as to convince the Jews of the truth of it, as they did other Christian teachings?
4. If the Trinity Doctrine was a solidly based truth, why didn't Jesus and his disciples contradict the Shema of the Old Testament? "Listen, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah." (Deut 6:4) Jesus even quoted this scripture at Mark 12:29.
5. Why would God tell his people to have nothing to do with the Pagan nations, if those Pagan nations had the right concept and beliefs about God? (a Trinity concept of God, as part of their worship, can be traced to virtually all Pagan nations of ancient times)
6. If Jesus is God, then who is the God of God? Jesus speaks of "my God" even in heaven. Why does Jesus say he has a God, if indeed he was God? (John 20:17; Revelation 3:12; 1:6; 1 Peter 1:3; 2 Cor. 1:3; Eph. 1:17; Ps. 89:26; Mark 15:34; Col. 1:3; Heb. 1:9; Ps. 45:7) Why is it that never in the Bible is the Father reported to refer to the Son as "my God", nor does either the Father or the Son refer to the holy spirit as "my God"?
7. Why is the Holy Spirit's role of the Trinity played down so much? Since the scriptures tell us that Mary was made pregnant by Holy Spirit, that would make the Holy Spirit THE FATHER. So who was the Father Father of?
8. Whose voice was it that spoke from the heavens when Jesus was baptized?
9. Who was Jesus praying to when he prayed? Himself?
10. If Jesus were God, why would Satan waste his time trying to tempt him? Was God Vulnerable?
11. Who has immortality? God? Jesus died (an impossibility of one with immortality) and was dead for parts of three days. How could God die? Who resurrected him? (Heb 5:7; Rev 2:8)
12. Who was Jesus talking to when hanging on his torture stake at Matthew 27:46? "About the ninth hour Jesus called out with a loud voice, saying: '...My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?'"
13. Since the doctrine of the Trinity states that the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit are coexistent and coequal; was Jesus lying at John 14:28 when he said "The Father is greater than I."? If Jesus meant he, as one third of the Trinity, was less the whole of the three in the Godhead then why did he not rather say 'God is greater than I'? How could Jesus state that one person of the Trinity was greater than another person of the Trinity? If the Son was lesser than himself while on earth, then where was that part of him that was coequal and coexistent with the Father?
14. If John 10:30 shows that Jesus and God are the same person when it says: "I and the Father are one.", explain John 17:20-26, "...in order that they may be one, just as we are one." Who was Jesus talking to? Does this mean that Jesus' true disciples are the same as God and Jesus and thus are apart of the Trinity (many-entity)?
15. If Jesus was really God on earth, how would there be a corresponding ransom? That would make Jesus a perfect God/man, while Adam was just a perfect man.
16. Who is the Son subjecting himself to at 1 Corinthians 15:28?
17. Does Matthew 3:11 indicate that the Holy Spirit is a person? (Water and fire are not persons)
18. How could the Holy Spirit be a person when it filled about 120 disciples at the same time? (Acts 2:4) How can you be full of someone?
19. If Jesus were Almighty God, why didn't Jesus correct Simon Peter when he asked him who he thought he was and Peter answered "You are the Son of the living God."? (Matthew 16:15-17)
20. If Jesus is God, explain the scripture at John 1:18, "No man has seen God."
21. Explain Revelation 1:1, if Jesus was God. If Jesus himself were part of a Godhead, would he have to be given a revelation by another part of the Godhead, God? Surely he would have known all about it, for God knew.
22. If Jesus is God, why call him Jesus Christ? Is Christ his last name? God was known as Jehovah God. Since "Christ" is just a title just like "God" is a title, shouldn't we just call him Jesus God? Or could it be that the tit le "Christ" gives us insight as to Jesus' position in relation to the Father?
23. Explain what the apostle Paul was concerned about in 2 Corinthians 11:3,4; Galatians 1:6-9; and Acts 20:29. Could it be he was warning about doctrines such as the Trinity? The Trinity Doctrine is of Pagan origin. That is Historical Fact. It was not accepted into the Christian Congregation until hundreds of years after the apostles were dead and gone. In 325 C.E. It was a non-Christian, a not baptized Pagan, who had murdered his son, his second wife, and several others of his relatives, who was responsible for bringing it into the Congregation as dogma. The Trinity teaches quite a different Christ than the apostle Paul taught. (l Corinthians 11:3, 8:5,6)
24. If the proper translation of John 1:1 is "God" and not "a god", simply because of the lack the "a" in the Greek text before the anathrous noun, God, then the same must be true of Acts 28:6. Why have ALL translations added the "a" in this scripture showing the apostle Paul to be thought "a god" instead of "God" when the preposition "a" doesn't exist in the Greek Text? Could it be that the context indicates such a translation as the correct one? Take a closer look at the context of John 1:1.
25. John 5:19 tells us that the "Son does nothing on his own". Why not?
26. Philippians 2:9-11 tells us that the Son was "exalted". When was this, and how is this possible if he is the Supreme One himself?
27. How is it that the Son is subjected to God along with all other things if the Son is coequal with the Father, or rather IS the Father also? (1 Corinthians 15:27,28
28. Who was Jesus talking to, and whose name had he made known? His Own? (John 17:6,26)
29. Why couldn't Jesus do anything of his own initiative, if he is Almighty God? (John 5:30 "I cannot do a single thing of my own initiative;...I seek not my own will but the will of him that sent me.") If Jesus were God, would he not send himself? (John 6:38 "Not my will, but the will of him that sent me.")
30. Who made Jesus come to the earth to die for us? Was it his idea? Hebrews 2:9 says: "but we behold Jesus who has been made a little lower than angels, crowned with glory and honor for having suffered death, that he by God's undeserved kindness might taste death for every [man]." It was God who sent him. If Jesus were God, why even make the distinction here, as is done throughout the Scriptures?
31. In view of Hebrews 2:9, could God ever at any time be lower than the angels? He is Almighty to time indefinite.
32. If Jesus were God, how could he appear before the person or presence of himself? Hebrew 9:24 states: "For Christ entered, not into a holy place made with hands, which is a copy of the reality, but into heaven itself, now to appear before the person (presence KJB) of God for us."
33 . Could it really be possible that the Almighty God and the creator of the universe was confined for nine months in the womb of Mary. If so, why didn't Satan take over the heavens with his demon angels and procure worship for himself, since this is what he has wanted from the beginning?
34. Since the angels are also called Sons of God (Gen 6:2), what does it mean that Jesus was God's only begotten son? (John 1:14; John 3:l6; 1 John 4:9) [Jesus was the only one directly created by God. All other things were created through (Greek: di', meaning instrument used) Jesus. Colossians 1:16-18. Gen 1:26 "Let us make man in our image." Jesus was his father's Master Worker. (Prov 8:22)]
35. If Jesus was God and from time indefinite to time indefinite, the Alpha and the Omega, without a beginning, etc., how could he be referred to as the FIRSTBORN of all creation, or the BEGINNING of creation? (Col 1:15; Rev 3:14
36. What is a son? If Jesus were actually God himself, why is he referred to as the Son of God, or God's Son over 85 times in the New Testament? Is the Bible making an inaccurate statement in each case? Why even describe him as the Son of God and confuse us if he was in fact Almighty God himself? Wouldn't it be simpler to just say that God came to the earth, the Almighty was born of a virgin, etc.? Why would Jesus continually talk about his Father in the heavens if in fact he was the Father in the form of the Son here on the earth? Wouldn't that be misrepresentation? (Luke 1:30-32)
37. If Jesus Christ is going to rule the Kingdom for a thousand years, (Revelation 20:4) who rules after that? 1 Corinthians 15:24 shows that Jesus turns all things over to GOD and his FATHER. Why would this be necessary if they are the same? Does this mean that Jesus turns it over to himself?
38. Mark 13:32 tells us: "Of that day or that hour no ones knows, not even the angel s in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." How could this be that the Father would know something that the Son would not, if they are truly coequal comprising one Godhead? And if, as some suggest, it was because the Son was limited by his human nature from knowing, why did the Holy Spirit not know?
39. "The mother of the sons of Zebedee...said to him [Jesus], 'Command that these two sons of mine may sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your Kingdom.' But Jesus answered,...'You will drink my cup, but to sit at my right hand and at my left is not my mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.'" (Matt 20:20-23) Why would Jesus say this if he was God? Was Jesus here merely answering according to his "human nature"? If, as Trinitarians say, Jesus was truly "God-man", both God and man, not one or the other, would it truly be consistent to resort to such an explanation? Does not Matt 20:2 3 rather show that the Son is not equal to the Father, and that the Father has reserved some prerogatives for himself?
40. Matthew 26:39 says: "Going a little farther he [Jesus Christ] fell on his face and prayed, 'My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt.'" If the Father and the Son were of one substance and not distinct individuals, wouldn't such a prayer have been meaningless? Jesus would have been praying to himself, and his will would of necessity have been the Father's will.
41. Matthew 12:31,32 tells us: "Every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come." Since if one sins against the Son and it is forgiven him, but if one sins against the Holy Spirit, it is no t forgiven him, does this mean that in some way the Holy Spirit is somehow greater than the Son? That would flatly contradict the Trinity.
42. The Hebrew word Shad dai' and the Greek word Pan tokra'tor are both translated "ALMIGHTY". Both original language words are repeatedly applied to Jehovah, the Father. (Exodus 6:3; Revelation 19:6) Why isn't this _expression ever applied to the Son or the Holy Spirit?
43. Since 1 Corinthians 11:3 says: "I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.", doesn't that show that God is of superior rank to Christ? Some feel that this is because Jesus was here on the earth. But it should be noted that this was written about 55 C.E., some 22 years after Jesus returned to heaven. So the truth here stated applies to the relationship between God and Christ in heaven.
44. Why isn't Jesus the One God that Christians are to worship? 1 Corinthians 8:5,6 reads: "Although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth - as indeed there are many 'gods' and many 'lords'-yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist." This presents the Father as the "one God" of Christians and as being in a class distinct from Jesus Christ.
45. Throughout the Scriptures Jesus is shown to be inferior to the Father in one respect or another such as at John 14:28 ("The Father is greater than I"). Since these Scriptures are often explained away by saying this was because the Son was limited by his fleshly form here on earth, does that mean that for 33 years there was no Trinity? Does that mean that for 33 years the Son was not Coequal, Coexistent, and Coeternal with the Father?
46. How can you use John 8:58 "Before Abraham was, I AM." and link it to Jehovah's statement at Exodus 3:14 "I AM has sent you"? Doing so would be making Jesus' statement "I AM" a title, a noun, thus making an improper sentence, an incomplete sentence, not making any sense. [EXAMPLE: Substitute any noun for "I AM": "Before Abraham was, house." etc.]
47. Why was Jesus viewed as the "one mediator between God and men,"? Since by definition a mediator is someone separate from those who need mediation, it would be a contradiction for Jesus to be one entity with either of the parties he is trying to reconcile. (Illustration: When Employers and Union personnel are negotiating a new contract, and are not getting anywhere, a Federal Mediator is called in to assist the two parties. He is impartial. He wouldn't be a fair mediator if he was actually an Employer, or a Union person would he? Likewise Jesus is a mediator between God and men. He is neither God or a man). When dealing only with one party you are not dealing with a mediator. As Galatians 3:20 states: "Now a mediator is not [a mediator] of one, but God is one."
48. What does it mean when Jesus is called Jesus CHRIST? It is not his last name. Christ means "Anointed One". If Jesus is God, how is it that he has been anointed? And by whom? Anointing is the giving of authority or a commission by a superior to someone who does not already have authority. Jesus said: "Jehovah's spirit is upon me, because he anointed me to declare good news to the poor." (Luke 4:18) Here God is plainly the superior, for he anointed Jesus, giving him authority that he did not previously have.
49. How is it that Jesus had to learn obedience? Hebrews 5:8 tells us that Jesus "learned obedience from the things he suffered." Can we imagine that God had to learn anything? No but Jesus did, for he did not know everything that God knew. And he had to learn something that God never needs to learn, OBEDIENCE. God never has to obey anyone.
50. If Jesus is God, why did Stephen see two individuals in heaven? Stephen "gazed into heaven and caught sight of God's glory and of Jesus standing at God's right hand." (Acts 7:55) Clearly he saw two separate individuals. And if Jesus is part of a triune Godhead, why didn't Stephen see the Holy Spirit also, or three individuals?
51. If any of the above questions are ultimately answered with the statement: IT'S A MYSTERY, then explain the following scriptures: 1 Corinthians 2:10; 1 John 5:20; 2 Tim 2:7; Eph 3:5, 1 Pet 1:12; and Luke 24:45. [courtesy of D. Harris]

A Handle:

what do you know about islam? what you have been taught by the political correct media and our politically educational system?

Al-Shawkani
Suyuti in his book استنباط التنزيل (Istenbat al tanzeel) says: “Every thing in the Qur'an about forgiveness is abrogated by verse 9:5.” Al-Shawkani in his book السيل الجرار (Alsaylu Jarar 4:518-519) says: “Islam is unanimous about fighting the unbelievers and forcing them to Islam or submitting and paying Jiziah (special tax paid only by Christians or Jews) or being killed. [The verses] about forgiving them are abrogated unanimously by the obligation of fighting in any case.”
Please note that I am not telling Muslims which verses to follow and which not. As I said earlier, I believe 100% in an individual’s right to choose his or her beliefs. However, what I am saying is that according to the Islamic doctrine of abrogation, these verses are null and void. They are contradicted by later verses, and in Islam it is the later verses which must be followed today.

Jihadist,

I know you want Victoria to stay Muslim so you are fanning the flames. With a screen name like Jihadist stop talking about people burning people at the stake.

Victoria:)

See what I mean. Read Deb Chatterjee's and Historian's posts.

Deb Chatterjee is so livid, she even misquoted Marx that religion is the opinion of the people. Not opiate.

And Historian is going into dhimmis of centuries past and not quite correct in his "facts" too.

And they are even talking about whether you should be regarded as an "enemy" or otherwise.

Are they going to burn you at the stakes (like a witch or heretic) or hang you up a tree like a lynched black next?

Errrr....we have met the enemy and it is our intolerance, hatred, fear and bigotry?

This is quite a modern day Inquisition if I ever saw one in the US. McCarthyism of religion?

Have you no decency sirs and madames?

Jihadist and Victoria

It is almost comical to me that both of you react to my post as if it is anti-Islam. But then, you are conditioned to being defensive.

Jihadist you say you are unconcerned about correcting the views of Americans -- okay then stop complaining.

Victoria, you say you speak out all the time. In fact, perhaps you speak out too much -- missing the point entirely at times and spewing a torrent of stuff.

Let me make it simple. I agree there is bigotry and misunderstanding against Islam.

Bigotry and misunderstanding come from ignorance.

If Muslims are not willing to take on the mantle of educating people about their religion, who will?

Don't count on Jerry Falwell or Pat Roberstson.

Jewish Dhimmis

On December 30, 1066, Muslim mob stormed the royal palace in Granada, crucified Jewish vizier Joseph ibn Naghrela and massacred most of the Jewish population of the city.

In the 12th century, rulers of the Almohad dynasty killed or forcibly converted Jews and Christians in Al-Andalus and the Maghreb, putting an end to the existence of Christian communities in North Africa outside Egypt.[55][56] In an effort to survive under Almohads, most Jews resorted to practicing Islam outwardly, while remaining faithful to Judaism; they openly reverted to Judaism after Almohad persecutions passed. During the Cordoba massacre of 1148, the Jewish philosopher, theologian, and physician Maimonides saved his own life only by converting to Islam; after Maimonides moved to Egypt, this conversion was ruled void by a Muslim judge who was a friend and patient of Maimonides.

In 1656, Shah Abbas I expelled the Jews from Isfahan and compelled them to adopt Islam, although the order was subsequently withdrawn, possibly because of the loss of fiscal revenues. In the early 18th century, Shia'a clergy attempted to force all dhimmis to embrace Islam, but without success. In 1830, all 2,500 Jews of Shiraz were forcibly converted to Islam. In 1839, Jews were massacred in Mashhad and survivors were forcibly converted. The same fate awaited the Jews of Barforoush in 1866, even though they were allowed to revert to Judaism after an intervention from the British and French ambassadors.

The Almohads and Muslim authorities in Yemen practiced forcible conversion of children. This practice was based on the belief that every child is born a Muslim. Suspecting a lack of sincerity on the part of Jews who were forcibly converted to Islam, Almohad rulers took Jewish children from their parents and raised those children as Muslims.[64] In Yemen, a 1922 Zaydi statute known as the Orphans Decree obligated the state to take under its protection and convert any dhimmi child whose parents had died (later extended to include fatherless children). Although possibly intended to alleviate the plight of orphaned children, the Jewish community was dismayed,and Jewish leaders who helped hide orphans were imprisoned and sometimes tortured.

In the Maghreb during changes of reign and periods of instability, Jewish quarters were pillaged and their inhabitants either massacred or abducted for ransom.

Outbreaks of violence, including massacres and expulsions, directed against dhimmis became more frequent from the late 18th century. In 1790, Jews were massacred in Tetouan and then in 1828, in Baghdad. In mid-19th century a wave of violence and forced conversions of Jews swept across Persia: in 1834, Jews were massacred in Safed, in 1839 in Mashhad, and in 1867 in Barforoush. Other outbreaks followed in Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, and other Arab countries of the Middle East.[102] In 1860, 5,000 Christians were massacred in Damascus.In 19th-century Iraq, especially in the area of Mosul, both Jews and Christians lived in a state of constant insecurity. Jewish quarters were destroyed in 1912 in Fes and as late as in 1948 in San‘a’.

All dhimmis:
Dhimmis were frequently referred to by derogatory names, both in the official and in the everyday speech. In the Ottoman Empire, the official appellation for dhimmis was "raya", meaning "a herd of cattle". In the Muslim parlance, "apes" was the standard epithet for the Jews, while Christians were frequently denoted as "pigs". These animalistic parallels were rooted in the Qur'anic verses describing some People of the Book being transformed into apes and pigs (Qur'an 5:60).

Echoing a saying attributed to Muhammad (Sahih Muslim 26:5389), Hasan al-Kafrawi, an 18th century scholar, advises that "if you [Muslims] encounter one of them [dhimmis] on the road, push him into the narrowest and tightest spot".Both Muslim sources and European travelers to the Middle East describe humiliations and insults of dhimmis, and especially of the Jews. Throwing of stones at dhimmis was a favorite amusement of Muslim children in many places from early times until nowadays

Regulations on dhimmi clothing varied frequently to please the whims of the ruler. Although the initiation of such regulations is usually attributed to Umar I, historical evidence suggests that it was the Abbasid caliphs who pioneered this practice. In 807, Harun al-Rashid ordered that Jews should wear high cone caps and yellow belts, the first prototypes of the yellow badge; Christians had to wear blue belts. These distinction marks became obsolete in 849 when al-Mutawakkil ordered dhimmis to put a yellow veil on their heads and shoulders and wear a wide belt. He also required them to wear small bells in public baths. In the 11th century, the Fatimid caliph Al-Hakim ordered Christians to put on half-meter wooden crosses and Jews to wear wooden calves around their necks. In the late 12th century, Almohad ruler Abu Yusuf ordered the Jews of the Maghreb to wear dark blue garments with long sleeves and saddle-like caps. His grandson Abdallah made a concession after appeals from the Jews, relaxing the required clothing to yellow garments and turbans. In the 16th century, Jews of the Maghreb could only wear sandals made of rushes and black turbans or caps with a red piece of garment on it.[124]

Ottoman sultans were similarly diligent and inventive in regulating the clothings of their non-Muslim subjects. In 1577, Murad III issued a firman forbidding Jews and Christians from wearing dresses, turbans, and sandals. In 1580, he changed his mind, restricting the previous prohibition to turbans and requiring dhimmis to wear black shoes; Jews and Christians also had to wear red and black hats, respectively. Observing in 1730 that some Muslims took to the habit of wearing caps similar to those of the Jews, Mahmud I ordered the hanging of the perpetrators. Mustafa III personally helped to enforce his decrees regarding clothes. In 1758, he was walking incognito in Istanbul and ordered the beheading of a Jew and an Armenian seen dressed in forbidden attire. The last Ottoman decree affirming the distinctive clothing for dhimmis was issued in 1837 by Mahmud II. Discriminatory clothing did not exist only in those Ottoman provinces where Christians were in majority, e.g. in Greece and the Balkans.

Shi'a Islam devotes much attention to the issues of ritual purity — tahara. Strict Shi'as consider Non-Muslims ritually unclean — najis — so that certain physical contact with them or things they touched with wet hands would require purification before undertaking religious or ritual duties. In Persia, where Shi'ism is dominant, these beliefs brought about restrictions that aimed at limiting physical contact between Muslims and dhimmis. In the late nineteenth-century, some very strict authorities in Iran forbade Jews to go out in rain or snow.

Pablo, Concerned et al

The whole world be converted to Islam? Judging from this thread, it is the Catholics and the evangelicals all fired up to save the souls of Muslims. One actually wondered if Falwell, Robertson and Graham, once having converted all Muslims, peace would reign.

And Victoria,

There is a "group assault" going on you here. You see, it is easier for them to attack Islam and Muslims rather than to explain on their dogmas and beliefs. That is why I never bothered in responding to these types.

The harder they insist their faith is true, the more they insist mine is false, satanic and such, the more I wonder what falseness of theirs they are hiding behind. It makes me wonder too if they are so hyper because they are convincing themselves instead of us. Tell some untruths long enough, tell it often and they will believe it.

They doth protest too much. Actually I don't wonder. Historically, the Christians can't stand the so-called "Muslim certainty" and "arrogance" of their beliefs and in rejecting the dogma of Trinity, atonement, original sin and such. This has been going on for centuries and will continue.

Victoria,

I did not make the post you are talking about. I would not expect outrage from the Muslim community since the Islamic conversion of the whole world flows directly from the Qur'an.

Do you believe that the whole world should and will be converted to Islam one day?

Pablo

Jihadist,

Simply admit that the Koran is not god-inspired. That it was written by some militaristic and women-hating scribe(s) who plagiarized the OT and NT, two other "good" books that have their own problems with myths, guilt trips and embellishments.

Hello Deb,

Victoria is not our enemy and even if she were we should treat her with love and respect as a fellow human being made in the image of God. I do believe that we should attack false belief systems but not people. The reason I say things plainly is because I want them to see the truth and experience the love of God.

Pablo