All Comments (65)

ISLAM Vs THE WEST

It seems that there are certain “Domestic Dogs” who are barking from within their master’s house. They talk high of their “rotten” Democracy & speak against Islam by describing it as a “Terrorist” cult. That is exactly what cheap people do. I am asking them to come out of their mother’s lap & be men enough to speak on the stage. Not like hiding behind their computer screens & taking advantage of not being seen. This sickness is very common in America. Well ofcourse it is a “Land of Gays.” We Muslims have challenged the whole world to come have open dialogues with us. Anybody who has dared, we have made for him his life a misery because when we roar on the stage, they leak in their pants. Take an example of Jimmy Swaggart, the greatest evangelist of America. Our beloved, Sheikh Ahmad Deedat, busted him open from the back in the greatest debate of the century in his own America. Not to mention that few years later that Swaggart was caught in the act of adultery. Now nobody has enough sperm to come & have debate with us on the stage in front of the whole world. Sorry, I forgot. How can timid puppies compete with roaring lions.

As for those, gutless, spermless cowards (especially Americans) who think & speak against Islam, let me tell you that Islam is the best thing that has ever happened to this world. We are ready to lay down our life for it. We are not hypocrites like you. What you say, We are terrorists? I say yes, we are terrorists. And our enemy is not a Christian or Jew or a Hindu or America or Israel. But our enemy is anyone who spreads evil in this world whether muslim or non-muslim e.g. George Bush, the Satan. If somehow he comes in our hands, we are going to tear him apart. We know what his evil intentions are. That he is after our natural resources, e.g. the Oil. And we also know that it was he who did the September 11 attack and killed 3000 innocent Americans. We also know that his motive behind September 11 attacks was to capture the middle east territories and justify his hooliganism in the name of fight against terrorism. He is the one who makes us terrorists & then use sophisticated weapons against us. But we Muslims we are ready for any challenge. He will never succeed even if he uses nuclear bombs against us. And I say the real terrorism is in America where the gang wars are a normal routine. People are being murdered and mutilated for property & money & women. Son is killing the father, daughter is killing the mother. Racism - Blacks are still the underprivileged class. They are being harassed. America is actually a racist nation and is boasting about democracy. We know what democracy is all about. We see it. It is nothing but a beautiful carpet to cover up your filth. Instead of caring for our problems Bush should rather ponder about his own America where problems are unsurmountable. Americans shut their eyes and say it is too dark for anybody to see anything. But baby, we know everything. Listen everybody, despite being the most advanced country in the world, America is nothing but a stinking pile of steaming garbage. According to your UN statistics, America is the No.1 rapist country in the world. More than 90,000 cases of reported rapes take place in America. And experts say that this is only 50 % of the actual toll. This is the respect they give to their mothers & sisters & daughters. I wonder whether there are any virgins in America. And they say that we Muslims subjugate our women. They show a Taliban man beating his wife with a stick on TV with poor video quality. I sneer at them. We put our women on the highest throne of honour. Then they laugh at us by saying Why are we allowed to have four wives? I say we are allowed but not compelled. But it is your compulsion. You Americans, you are compelled to follow Islam because your statistics by American division of population say that there are about 5 million women more than men in America. If every man in America gets married, there will be 5 million women who can’t get husbands. And we know every man does not get married because your manpower is not upto mark. You have more than 50 million sodomites in your country. You call them gays. Another 50 million women can’t get husbands. And men are dying of smoking, drinking, accidents etc. And your prison population, 98% are men. Your problems are getting compounded. You say One man One wife? Now I see why your poor women are becoming Lesbians and prostitutes. And this problem is universal in all the Christian dominated countries. There are more than 40 million women in Christian countries more than men. Islam is their compulsion. More than 20 % of Americans commit incest with their mothers & sisters & daughters. I spit at such a country & such democracy. And the men have become freaks, mental freaks. Everytime I hear in the news, such n such woman was raped & ripped apart, such n such woman was raped & ripped apart in America. And the illegitimate children. You call them “b**tards”. By the way “b**tard” is not a vulgar term. It is used three times in the Bible – “The book of God”. Some experts say that “more than 60 % Americans are “b**tards” – i.e. the result of either pre marital sex or adultery or incest.” Woooh, I almost lost my senses. And drug addiction – that’s your passion. And alcoholism – beyond all limits. We muslims, I can boast, is the biggest community of teetotalers in the world. And your AIDS. Its like an epidemic in America. I suggest to all the people, when you go to America, keep your noses covered. Your pornography, adultery, discos & dances, fornication …. I can go on & on. And finally, the love that you shower upon your unripe children by molesting then - One of the biggest sins. The heart of a child is like a butter paper – it quivers very fast. Their soul is very pure & their mind is very innocent. And you play with their innocence? How can you do that?

I used America as a prototype to describe a typical democracy. Individual freedom is there, but this freedom very often makes the weak a social & political slave. Democracy is only for those who understand it & play games with it. If democracy cannot save the chastity of its people, then hell with such a democracy. We muslims may not be economically advanced or have a great infrastructure, but Islam gives us a system where we can enjoy social & political freedom & protection at the cost of a small amount of individual freedom. Our moral values are still intact & that is our criteria of development which makes America the most under-developed country in the world.

I say, Come, Talk to us. Talk to us. If you have the guts talk to us – ON THE STAGE. Talk to us in front of the whole world. Not from your mother’s lap, Talk to us. Debate with us and I will tell you what destruction democracy has brought to you. You have tried things. What are you? Look at you. You say democracy, I say you have failed. What you say – Communism. He destruction that Communism brought to Soviet Union, to China. You say Christianism, Hinduism, Judiaism, Marxism, Atheism …. What have you got? you haven’t got a thing. Shshshhsh.. everything brought destruction to the world and I will tell you how. Talk to me on the stage in front of the whole world.

Imraan Sheykh
Kashmir

Att: HALOZCEL, et al;

Kassa Hay!?, Teekae!?, Toom Pogol?, Achae!

Beautifully & so truly & clearly said HALOZCEL!

4.5 thumbs-up for you bloke!

....,there are "NO" (not) Human Rights and Contemporary Values in Indonesia and Malaysia.

Indonesia is not Australia,but the land of cannibals(Borneo,New Guinea).

Pancasila is the empty word.

---
For Your Information and the World:

Indonesia & Malasia ("i"'ve been there too) was not supposed to be a 'Islamic Nation'! They was like 'savages' etc.. And

Today they have 'ALLAH' instead of G-D, not god! The Only thing is they do not throw spears or have spit ball fights laike in their Nature & Animal worhip Voodoo ways.

Important:
ISLAM is a ZIONIST People (short of calling them Animals) , via "AL TAQIYAh {Islamic ZIONIZM for Mid-East, Far-East & international Domination.

Please see [un] holy QURAN/KORAn that reads,
"Befriend them, Spy on them, use them, they (Non-Islamics) are 'INFERIOR" to you.... until the word for Jihad is given..."

QURAN: @ 3:28, 6:106... and "Surrender to 'Allah' not your God.." @ 3:85 & 2:256 et seq!

Example; Amazing how, under Pretext of 'Islam' (a Religion of Many in Competition) and via the 'Wahabi' [Saudi Islamic Elders of Al-Taqiya" (which is in my new-book) aka Islamic-ZIONIZM, like 'Hallal is same as Kosher etc..] STOLE The TWO PAKISTANS (West/East) under internal CIVIL-WAR (Musloms Vs. Hindu's) and threat to INDIA (mahatma Ghandi, Nuri et al)!

Please see wiki's 'Al Taqiya', thanks; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqiyya

--

So India, under threats via ISLAM Jihad (with Saudi Arabia Wahabi's vintriloquisting this great LAND-THEFT, not Israel) had gotten a peacefull? share of the Hindi-Boluchistan Pie!, "i" call this phenomenon the 1947 Islamic Civil-War Threat Dividend (not 1948 Israel State creation), because India was scared S.H.I.T. so to speaketh in American & not English herein!

--

IT's TRUE (opposite of Myth) that 'MU-HAM-MAD' is & was the Last Prophet. But only for Middle-East & near East!

But Not & NEVER in sweet sweet Holy Cosmic APOCALYPTIC NATION, A*M*E*R*i*C*A!

Trivia: Did you know that it was Murderer Mu-'HAM'-mad whom my great great... Aunt, and of whom this Muham enslaved as a 'concubine', after Murdering my Great Uncle, that she had Murdered him back via 'poison meat'..

YES, according to what my Father Mr. 'Z' [pbuh] told me, shortly (to wait 20 years befor telling anyone) before he died, that She (will not reveal the names) is a JOKTANian Eberu (ECLATi-ON, aka "KATAN people of the [missing] Book") not a PELEGian (ECLATi-OFF!]like Muhammad, Abraham, Jesus, Vyasa, Gautama, Confucis etc..

Note: HAZOCEL, et al;

Soon, Very soon, Saudi Arabia will be swimming & Drinking & Drown in their 'wikid' BLACK, not so sweet PETROLEUM (like Dinosaurs Dung/peepee etc..). The Islamic Saudi's Push Oil that , was in Fact created i50,000,000 years ago & not in 6 [un] holy Biblical Days! Shame! Shame!

Blame Israel, Blame Blame for 'stealing Land' from "WILD" HomoSapiens(?)! a/k/a Palistinians aka 'CANAANites' ('Low-Lifes of low Lands'). but distract the world from this 'DEEPER PROPHECY' about Islamic "AL-TAQIYAh" and
Stealing (Pre-Apocalyptic religious Pretext) Land from INDIA via Mass Civil strife & Calamitys, aka 'ISLAMIC JIHAD'!

VOTE: iLLEGALIZE Islam religious Institution(s) in Sweet sweet USA, a genuinely "Holy & blessed Cosmic Nation , aka a TRANSFINITE-CIVILIZATION to be, as PROPHECIED in All 5-Major-Religions of todays World!

GOODBYE ISLAM & other Pre-Apocalyptic 'SuperStupidStitious' HUMAN (not Us HUMATES) made god competing SYSTEM(s) INSTEAD OF G-D, aka EPONYMOUS E*C*L*A*T*i, a Miracle (zero bible as if SIN/CURSE)

Note: Islams Prophetic Down-Fall , besides MENS-REA (guilty minds via MEMETICs), was that instead of worshipping 'IDOLS' or 'IDOLATARYS' at the [un] holy KABBA, that out of, an Eclati-On Term, "REligious-"Jealousy Psychosis" and "Pre-Apocalyptic SYNDROMES that they Plagerized, Copy Catted & mass murdered , Peacefull & beautifull ZOROASTRIANS (like those '3-Wise men whom the Bibles say visited JEZEUS in his Manjer/Crib) that "SHARIA" is Begot! So there is ZERO Holiness or Gloriousness therein & therefrom!!!

(hence their prophetic, not just pathetic, 'Wild'ness' weather you take them out of Deserts, Caves, Jungles , island nor continents..)

It's still POISON! a/k/a WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!

Trivia: Did ye knowth that when , like say during attack, that KORANOHOLICS, so to speaketh Truth (opposite of MYTH) that their cavalry yells-out (not un-Judo/Karati tactics) or passionately do scream-out "ALLAH (their god not 'O.U.R. G-D') AKBAR (their god , not 'O.U.R.-G-D' is "Greater" better than O.U.R.-G-D!???)

Note: in a way, "Allah" by "ITSELF" [Eponymous ECLATi] is O.K.! But, But, But, when Mixed with 'Ahkbar' (fighting Words, many a Greater Better newer god System) is not 'HALLAL" , same as saying 'KOSHER"! Ya Ya Momma Poppa Monosa Mono's!

---

Behold:

"Hear O' Sweet sweet U.S. of A., AMERICA is truly ONE now, under E*C*L*A*T-i-N*i*T*Y"

))))2)0)0)8))))) "NO-SHARIA!"
!
!
!
{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}}}{}}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}}
[ ?: +) http:///\ VOTE http://\Hillary )
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
{}{}{}{}}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}}{}{}{}{}
[ ?: +) http:///\ VOTE http://\Hillary )
[][][][][]][][]][]][]]][]][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
PEACE, PAZ, SALAAM, SHOLOM:........______________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton МИР,평화, 和平:

VOTE:
NO' Sharia!
NO Hallakha!
NO Caste System(s)!
NO Rule By BiBLE, GiTA, QURAN!
NO Putting Down Woman Anywhere!

THANK YOU!

SHOOKREA!

So-called *islamic bank* is a manipulation.
Islam forbids *Reeba*,not interest of Bank.What *Muamalat Bank* gives as *Profit share* is not so much different from the interest/premium of Citibank.

Besides,there are not Human Rights and Contemporary Values in Indonesia and Malaysia.
Indonesia is not Australia,but the land of cannibals(Borneo,New Guinea).
Pancasila is the empty word.
1-Belief in the one and only God(not God,but Allah)
2-Just and Civilised humanity(?),in which islamic country ??
Internationalism doesnt mean Cosmopolitanism.What does it mean ?
Islam rejects Internationalism.Islamic *justice* means Sharia Law and it strongly refuses Human Rights.

!
>))))2)0)0)8))))) "NO-SHARIA!"
!
!
!
{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}}}{}}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}}
[ ?: +) http:///\ VOTE http://\Hillary )
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
{}{}{}{}}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}}{}{}{}{}
[ ?: +) http:///\ VOTE http://\Hillary )
[][][][][]][][]][]][]]][]][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
PEACE, PAZ, SALAAM, SHOLOM:........______________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton МИР,평화, 和平:

VOTE:
NO' Sharia!
NO Hallakha!
NO Caste System(s)!
NO Rule By BiBLE, GiTA, QURAN!
NO Putting Down Woman Anywhere!

THANK YOU!

I believe that you are being dishonest about quoting a few hand-picked excerpts from the website, muslimmatters, while not mentioning the disclaimer on the article that op-eds don't represent the opinions of all writers. I agree the article was poorly written as well (the one you quoted, seems they were guest-writers), but other staff writers(so it seems) disagreed quite strongly in the comments.

And what does this have to do with THIS post in question? Mr. Amad merely suggested that these opinions do not represent majority of Muslims, and you have not refuted that point, have you? The organization Ms. Pamela represents is disliked and completely abandoned by mainstream Muslims. This is fact, not fiction.

Amad-

Thanks for pointing me to-

http://muslimmatters.org/

Interesting reading and very informative to the western reader, ie:

Conversation with a Jinn-
I started of with the adhaan and some recitation from Qur’an until it, or she to be precise, agreed to talk to me. She was a female Jinnee named Seeta who had possessed a Muslim girl for almost 6-7 years. It wasn’t a voluntary possession rather a case of black magic. As advised, I tried to invite her to Islam first. Apparently it was the first time anyone had ever invited her to Islam so she was a little shocked.

And

The Muslim Woman’s Achilles Heel-the Second Wife-
But even after years of reflection and consideration, I still haven’t been able to put a finger on why the vast majority of Muslim wives cannot stand to even discuss the topic without losing their cool. How do I view the situation? First of all if Allah has permitted it, how can one oppose it or be ‘totally against it’? I just cannot see the logic in it. Secondly, since women tend to view the situation extremely personally, if you can’t keep an animal tied up in your yard forcibly, how can you keep a human being? If a husband wants to marry again, why should he be stopped? Of course he should be able to support two wives and be willing to keep equality between them. But that is not for the women to worry about. That is between him and Allah. Islam has said that he should attempt multiple marriages only if he is able to keep equality. But that would be a discussion for the men. My argument is that Muslim women first need to get the ‘hang of the idea’ that if their husband wants to get married, he should be allowed to do so without the usual excessive fuss and ruckus associated with the event.

Amad,

The key word is "civil-ization". When Muslims like yourself finally admit to and correct the many flaws in Islam, then and only then will Islam become a civil religion worthy of becoming a member of the civilized world.

Unfortunately, Newsweek and other media outlets continue to seek fringe opinions from the fringe group of "progressives", while ignoring the 99% of Muslims that represent mainstream. How many members do people think the Progressive group have? I can tell you, having been involved in community activism for over a decade, that this fringe element has not gotten any significant footing, despite MSM's attempts to shove Progressives down the mainstream's throats.

Pamela, while I respect her right to express her opinions, does not represent the majority of Muslims. And it is dishonest for Newsweek to continue to serve us with sugar pills that precludes a truly honest dialogue.

This is a post I wrote directed to media professionals:

http://muslimmatters.org/2008/01/09/tarek-fatah-and-does-not-represent-me-muslims-101-for-media/

What Muslims are thinking is represented more by the links in this post:
http://muslimmatters.org/2008/02/12/foxs-struggle-war-against-terrorism-shariah-in-uk/

Is this phony actually a real Muslim? "Taylor" isn't exactly a Muslim surname and she doesn't look Muslim. Is she an infiltrator, the same as "Christians" such as John Shelby Spong are infiltrators, seeking to destroy the religions they dishonestly profess?

Thank you, thank you, Ms. Taylor for writing an eloquent and throughtful riposte, based on empirical evidence and rational analysis, to the touch-feely, anti-intellectual poppycock that advocates incorporating the Sharia into our Western legal systems.

Ms. Taylor,

Thank you for your thoughtful comments. A couple days ago a friend and I were discussing this issue. His point was that western jurispurdence captures and codifies christian thought, though we call it civil law. I can see his point, and to some degree it is ture. However, like you, I pointed out that the basis for a republican democratic government was equal rights under the law and share the same concerns as you for what happen to women under the law. In addition, laws mean nothing unless they are enforcable. Are we going to have the police enforcing Shari'ah?

Again, thank you for your intelligent comments.

It is sad to see that people in the west are still living in dark age, when it comes to knowing Islam and Christian past.

It is sad to see that people in the west are still living in dark age, when it comes to knowing Islam and Christian past.

It would be an extremely bad idea to modify American Jurispudence to accomodate any form of Shariah law. The application of a just and fair justice system is difficult enough without requiring religious intrepretations that are foreign to Western culture.

Frankly I fail to see the need to have this discussion and wonder about the origins of the dialogue.

Sure, I think every american woman should be forced to wear a rag over her face. And be sure not to show a bit of your calf!!!
Or you will get whacked with a stick by a man, who knows how you should live!
any man, who would watch his wife get beaten or would allow these laws to be enforced upon their wives are not men.

then you have better establish another education system for virtues of children, other than religionsoftheworld approach, and make sure it is real.

Don't hold your breath anytime soon. That is the most rediculous question I have ever heard. That religion is nothing but another word for terror.

Jim Miller,

It is obvious that you suffer from the Three B's, i.e. you were Bred, Born and Brainwashed in Christianity as many of us were. See the Five Step Program for Cleansing/"Deflawing" Catholicism/Christianity as listed below:

1. There were no physical Resurrection, Ascension, and Assumption since Heaven is a spirit state, i.e. no physical bodies plus the stories fail historic attestation and stratum reviews. e.g. http://wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php/017_Resurrection_of_Jesus

2. Angels/devils do not exist. These are the mythical creations of ancient civilizations, e.g. Hittites, to explain/define natural events, contacts with their gods, big birds, sudden winds, protectors during the dark nights, etc. No "pretty/ugly wingy thingies" ever visited or talked to Mohammed, Jesus, Mary or Joseph or Joe Smith. Today we would classify angels as fairies and "tinker bells". Modern devils are classified as the demons of the demented.

3. Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons/parts and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider.

4. The Holy Eucharist/Communion is a nice spirit symbol of our thanksgiving but body and blood do not exist there. This 24/7 blood sacrifice is simply more theological mumbo jumbo to keep the "pew sitters" agape in atonement.

5. There is no evidence, scriptural or otherwise that Jesus is the son of god. He was made into this offspring to compete with the Roman and Greek gods. e.g.

Stories circulated to the effect that Alexander of Macedonia was not only the son of Philip II, but also of the god Zeus-Ammon (Plutarch, Parallel Lives, "Alexander" 2.1-3.2); Plato was the son of Ariston and the god Apollo (Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers 3.1-2), and Augustus was the son of Octavius as well as the god Apollo (Suetonius, Lives o f the Caesars 2.4.1-7). The extraordinary character of these elites reputedly stemmed from both their divine origins and their kingroups. Their kin-groups provided one form of legitimation-political right to the throne and/or social status (thus the importance of Joseph in Matthew's genealogy). Their divine procreation provided another: their honor was divinely ascribed, and their greatness as leaders derived from divine paternity."

From: K.C. Hanson and D. E. Oakman, Palestine in the Time of Jesus, Fortress Press, 1998. p.55

Jim, peruse these five steps and your neurons will slowly be cleansed of 2000 years of lies and distortions.

I can't believe the filth I have just read about my Lord Jesus Christ, what is wrong with you are you mentally ill and if so or even if you are just evil I will pray for you.Jesus was not some one made up or a person tripping, are you nuts!!!
Into vampirism, you speak of the Symbolic blood of My Lord in the Grail, I feel sorry for you and will pray for your soul.

I agree completely with Pamela Taylor's opinion that the goverment needs to stay out of religon and religon out of goverment. I believe starting down that road would only end in sorrow for many of us, myself a Roman Catholic,would not want this goverment setting rules for my practice of faith. All anyone has to do is read the history of europe in this last century to see what can happen if people stand aside and be quiet just a little while, remember that Hitler was only in power twelve years.The fact that Islam doesn't for the most part support women growing in society shows that it hasn't broke out of the egg into the modern day and that is scary and needs to be watched. I say bravo to Ms. Taylor for having the strenght to fight the 8th century.
Thank You,
Jim Miller

WHAT?:

There is but one deadly sin, blasphemy. All who worship any God based upon the being in the burning bush blaspheme. That includes all three great faiths, Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

God punishes blasphemy. Will the punishment, 9/11 for example or Archbishop of Canterbury making the law of the land conform to Islam, etc ever end? Only when no significant political group uses any God derived from the being in the burning bush.

The being in the burning bush was Lucifer a devil and not God at all. God punishes now attempting to bring the human race to it's senses.

Look about you. Where did all this chaos come from? There must be a hell. Do you know who is the Lord God of hell? It's the same God that is the Lord God of Israel and Islam and Rome, a would-be God named Lucifer.

I am secular agnostic. The apathetic kind, which in my personal opinion the only way to go. I believe in secularism and recognize the many wars and sacrifices the West has made to get here.

My points:

- First of all, to claim the religion is the root of ALL evil is simply wrong. The history of the 20th century if packed full with atheist governments that committed atrocities just as bad (and in some cases worst) than prior religious societies. Neither the Church nor the Atheists have any valid stance when claiming moral superiority over each other. (Nor examples to back it up )

- There are places were Muslim faith seems to do ok within the West ( I am from the Canary Islands Spain, and the Muslim population there lives in probably one of the most ultra-liberal, least religious societies of all Europe and seem to have no problems...for now). But the truth is that the Muslim faith annoys most of us who are not religious, basically because it negates freedoms, rights and reason we hold so dear. It requires from us to give concessions for "free" to estrangers who not only had no stake on the fight, but want to change the very same freedoms they claim for themselves.

- However, all the disagreement with Islam does not entitle me or anyone else to talk about these human beings as if they were garbage. I see lots of racism and "reversed religious" hate from some of the commenter, who I gather are probably the flip side of this coin...conservative Christians, who in my opinion as are fanatical and wrong as their muslim counterparts.

- For Muslims to use the story of the Crusades as an excuse or point in an argument about modern societies is flawed beyond logic. Aside form the fact this happened centuries ago, that we cannot judge history with today' eyes (same argument why some of the Koran's Suras listed above have to be read within the historical context according to Muslims), it only reinforces the idea that we need to fold back to Medieval values in order to justify modern values.

- And for my fellow secularists: Tone down a bit. A dogma is a dogma, religious or secular. There are plenty of good, decent religious people who have never hurt a soul. I may never visit their churches, pray to their Gods or believe the same as they do, but does not mean I can enjoy their friendship, be able to help each other and carve a niche in my life for them. Moral arrogance and intolerance without reason and temperance only leads to the same violent non-sense.

>> Abraham is viewed as the foundation of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

>>That's punishment right there.

Punishment to whom? 'Punishment' in the eyes of an unbeliever only. A senseless commentary that you expect Christians, for example, to say 'Oh yeah...hes right' Not going to happen, my friend

>>Did God punish Noah, Abraham, Sarah, Jacob, and Joseph for their actions?

These reaped the consequences of their actions....just as you and I do. Doesnt mean God doesnt have a purpose to work thru them...or any others. You really dont understand what man has done and God's role in it all, do you?

>>As for the New Testament... until the Old Testament is no longer considered part of Christianity, one cannot say that God is only in the New Testament and not in the Old.

??????????????????????????????? (not sure where youre going with that one)

All the best

Assalamu Alaikum
Imam Pamela Taylor

Been a week, I look in and what a question for Americans to ponder:)

The Archbishop of Canterbury has suggested that English law must accommodate some aspects of Islamic law, or shariah?

Should U.S. law make room for shariah?

It has been a quite a while since I heard the collective loosening of the stiff upper lips by the British. Thanks to Dr. Rowan Williams' speech on the Shariah.

The Muslim community in UK, like in the US, are of many ethnic origins and cultures. But a high percentage of British Muslims are from the Indian sub-continent (Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis) called "Asians" by the British. So, imagine the different interpretations of Islam and Shariah then among British Muslims from Morocco to Indonesia.

The Shariah is not quite as fixed as many assume and presume. Many Muslim states revise or update the Shariah, including Islamic Family Law governing marraige, divorce, alimony, child support. In some Muslim states, the Shariah governs everything from crime to marraige.

In other Muslim states, only specific aspects of Shariah are applied while the rest are by civil laws. So, application of "classical" Shariah varies in Muslim states from full extent as in Afghanistan, to none as in Turkey.

As for the reaction of the British, one would have thought that Britain is one of the countries acting in compliance with and a facilitator of certain aspects of Shariah. After all, Britain is actively promoting and positioning itself as a global centre for a certain Shariah-compliant activitity, namely Islamic banking. So, it is also a global Shariah promotion centre no?

When British Prime Minister Gordon Brown was Chancellor of the Exchequer, he made an interesting keynote speech on Islamic banking that only one in such business would be interested in as part of a collection on what governments around the world, Muslim and non-Muslim, are saying as their stance on Islamic banking and financial services for professional reasons of course.

So, on 13 June 2006, Chancellor Brown, in a speech at the Seventh Annual Islamic Finance and Trade Conference (at the Royal Lancaster Hotel in London) organised by the Muslim Council of Britain, said among other things, the intention to make Britain the "gateway" to Islamic trade, as "global centre" for Islamic finance, and Britain "pioneering" Islamic banking, London having more banks supplying "services under Islamic principles" than any western financial centre.

Well, then, the British government did put in place tax and regulatory reform to support the development of Shariah compliant finance - Islamic mortgages, sukuk, etc.

Mr. Brown in this speech, also stated:

"...and all these steps are not about us- the Government - or you - the Muslim community - doing the expedient thing. It is about us together doing the right thing : recognising that we live in a world that is increasingly interdependent - what Martin Luther King Jr. called our inescapable network of mutuality - and recognising also not just the interests we share in ommon, but the values we share in common."

Let me see. Some Islamic banks in UK have forms for mortgages and loans which among others, under list of spouses, have four lines for applicants to fill in - to accomodate any Muslim men who many have up to four wives or course.

Well, then, I have no further comment on the British fuss over what Dr. Rowan Williams said in his speech. He is only the Archbishop of Canterbury, not the Chancellor of the Exchequer, not the Prime Minister, not the British Parliament. He has no power to enact and implement laws.

It is for the British and their government to consider Shariah compliant aspects being promoted by the British government:

- on the social aspects (marraige, divorce, alimony, child support) for the British Muslims,

- on the trade and finance aspects (Islamic banking and finance) for the British Muslims who wishes so.

One can only assume that the British goverment is only acting in the best interest of who is anyone's guess. But I did enjoy reading Mr. Brown throwing around words like "sukuk" and quoting Hadiths in his speech of 13 June 2006 at the Islamic Finance and Trade Conference. Makes him sound like an esteemed Muslim scholar or ulema in London/UK as the new global centre for certain Shariah compliant activities:).

Thank you and best regards

"J"

Can you all just render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and unto your gods the things which are your gods', and all just get along?

Confused:

You wrote

The Qu'ran states in Sura 9:5-6, "fight and slay Jews and Christians wherever you find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war..."

While this is a lovely example of truthiness, it is not in fact true. The Sura refers explicitly to Pagans, which at that time meant those who were NOT Christians or Jews. Moreover, this Sura is followed by, "If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah. and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge."

This is certainly more leeway than Christians gave Jews or Muslims during the sack of Jerusalem, and during the Inquisition Jews fled Christian Europe for Islamic regions because they were more tolerant.

This is not to say that there were (or are) no violent tendencies in Islam. Just that to characterize any of the major religions as either peaceful or violent is to display a remarkable ignorance of history.

Visit www.politicalislam.org (Political Islam Online) for translation and analysis of Arab/Muslim articles on the issues of women, politics and Islam

The Archbishop of Canterbury cannot think of anything constructive to say about Christianity. He has run out of ideas.

With all due respect, we disagree. You have taken the definition of "shariah" as defined by the "orientalists" and then defended yourself and your rights from their definition. Amazing.

We are one human civilization. Knowledge was transferred back and forth. British common law did not grow on the leaves of Sherwood Forest. Socrates could not have been an intelelctual without Egyptian knowledge. Thomas Acquinas would have been nothing without the research of Ibn Rushd and the Arab translations of Plato.

Imam Faisal says that "America is the most shariah compliant country in the world". We agree!

The Magna carta has Islamic origins. See research of John Maksudi. Trial by jury, "Qanoon" (cannon), judges, and many aspects of common law is based on the Quran. Many aspects of common law is based on the ten commandments of the Bible and hence also on the Quran.
http://www.Rupeenews.com
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing sister. Read up and God Bless you!

Rungus:

Perhaps the archbishop is just open minded.

Reconciling disparate factions means thinking outside of the box.

I agree with Rob. All religions that have come down the pike so far, in general as a belief system, foster fanaticism, intolerance and dominance. Religion is a bad thing for us humans. This time, in which we are all currently living, is most interesting and will be seen one hundred or two hundred or three hundred years from now as a time of second enlightenment and great debate and teeth gnashing and wailing as we all, in humankind, eventually get this religion concept out of our lives. Our noses are so close to wall, as they should be in real life, we can't see clearly. But that is what is happening. I do know one thing right now- most of the evil and poor human behavior we have suffered, experienced and observed, from the beginning, is rooted in religious motivation. And, I know one other thing, a meteor flashes at its brightest just before it flames out. Religion, hallelujah, is flaming out!

A rarely mentioned book of the Old Testament called Judges is relevant to this discussion.

Early in their history just after they crossed into the promised land the Israelites were ruled by "judges." Initially, God told them not to have a king. These judges were religious leaders who had the ability to prophesy.

Significantly,one of the first chief judges was a woman; her name was Deborah.

I always cite her as an example to conservative evangelicals who say that God doesn't want female leaders.

Moses' father-in-law had previously helped him create a judicial system. Initially, Moses heard all disputes himself. His father-in-law convinced him to only hear important matters. Remember there were at least 1 1/2 million Hebrews coming out of Egypt

This practice continued in the early Christian church (1Corinthians chapter 6). One wonders whether the Archbishop has a hidden agenda.

The brutalities and extremism of the Spanish Inquisition are well known, but the world used to look to religious leaders for major decisions. The pope's ruling regarding the disposition of the lands in the new world were final and led to the avoidance of war between Spain, England and France over the issue.

As messed up as our nation's leadership is, truly holy religious leadership might be an improvement.

One would hope we in the West would resist just as violently the imposition of Shari'ah law, as the people of Iraq are resisting the imposition of, for them, an equally alien concept--democracy.

Within the last couple years, there was a proposal in Ontario to do essentially what Archnishop Rowan discussed. That is, Shari'a tribunals would be established to which Muslims could choose to use to adjudicate family, business etc. disputes among themselves. The proposal appeared to be unclear about the deference, if any, that Provincial courts were expected to give to decisions of the Shari'ah courts.

Women's groups and secularists of all persuasions opposed the proposal, saying that it was inappropriate to have a parallel legal authority and that Muslim women -- epecially from the large South Asian immigrant communities in the Toronto area -- could easily be unaware of their rights under Canadian law and be coerced by their male relatives and religions leaders into accepting decisions from the Shari'ah courts that were inconsistent with the Charter (Canda's equivalent of the U.S. Bill of Rights). These objections were persuasive to the Provincial government, which rejected the proposal.

The Provincial government's response was the right one, in my view. The fundamental premises of a religiously-based system like Shari'a and the law of a secular, Western, constitutional democracy are radically different. It is not possible to give decisionmaking authority to the former without diminishing the strength of the latter.

It is ironic that Archbishop Rowan, who seems so willing to accommodate a system of law so deeply at odds with Anglo-American legal thought, is the same person who cooperates with the reactionary African bishops who would read the U.S. Episcopal Church out of the Anglican communion for ordaining a gay bishop. For the good archbishop, it appears a system of law that relegates women to 4th-class status is acceptable, but treating gay Christians as equal human beings is offensive.

The founding father's commitment to Christian faith was varied, and its impact on the constitution has been overstated.

Since that time we've advanced far enough to have two world wars that resulted in an accumulated death toll of over 60 million.

These modern wars had nothing to with religion.

The civil war, by way of contrast did, to an extent. Here, the abolitionists and their effect on Lincoln was positive.

Anyway, the archbishop's suggestion was limited and only included situations where BOTH parties agreed.

This hardly equates with establishing a specific religion.

Archbishop RW's comments portray his naive, PC, blow-with-the-wind values. I doubt RW even fully believes in the correctness of his own Christian faith.

You correctly point out that Sharia itself has vastly different interpretations across the Muslim World. What the "thoughtful" RW sees is a very narrow slice - mainly the culture and Sharia of certain groups from Pakistan. Even within this, a large share of these immigrants to Britain tend to come from just a few Provinces. Therefore, it is as though someone in the East were to say - "we should consider accepting into our body of law the religious code of the Reformed Pentecostalist Church of Uganda" ie) representing only the narrowist slice of the Christian religion.

This is just one of many examples to show that regardless of his "learning" or the number of languages he may speak (one of which may be "nonsense") the Archbishop has proven himself to be completely incompetent at holding together the Anglican Church.

Rob:

You might be guilty of slight exaggeration.

What's wrong with people having differing views?

We already tried incorporating religious codes into the law in the West. It led to the bloodiest wars you can imagine. "Those who forget the mistakes of the past are condemned to repeat them" (slightly adapted from Santayana).

The Founding Fathers were well acquainted with the maiming and killing for centuries that result from the state siding with or standing for one religious faction. That's why they designed the new Nation as accepting all religious faith and favoring none. Those who don't understand why that means the Nation's laws cannot be based on specific religious faith, just don't get it.

PS.

Jeff:

I forgot to add that laws concerning holiday displays on public property, and the administration of federal grants to faith groups that deliver social services like drug counseling seem to be doing a good job of accomodating most major faiths.

If you are not a believer in any religion that is fine, but why all the anger?

I think that Pamela has written a very nice article, but it seems to be hard for some to understand the difference between religion and religious power within government. I beleive that is why most people don't anyways support large religious institutions such as the Catholic Church - a corruption is exposed when power is introduced into the religious structures that takes away from the faith. It happens the other way around and for our society in the US to thrive towards those ideals of a fair society, we must keep religion out of the laws. We will seem the INFLUENCE of religion in laws by those lawmakers who write them and the voters who vote for them, but remaining secular keeps the extremists out. And, I think we all agree that extremists in any religion is not a good thing for minority groups, but also more often than not corrupts the religion for ulterior motives.

Jeff:

I appreciate your comment. I was really focused just on the option of mediation of disputes with the religious rules "of your choice" as they apparently already have in England. You couldn't allow it for Muslims and then disallow it for Jews, for example.

Moreover, The typical "culture war" battlegrounds are virtually meaningless to me. For one, the pledge of allegiance isn't really about God at all, but pledging allegiance to the FLAG. I'm only interested in faith that transforms in positive spiritual ways to create a more loving and peaceful world.

Issues such as "intelligent design" (equally dishonest I agree) seek to introduce biblical info into science class. Faith isn't science. The real issue is allowing more religious study in high school as electives; of all faiths. Then we would see how much we have in common.

Regarding prayer at school. I just don't see the grave harm in having to silently listen to a prayer. You hear worse on the subway, walking down the street, or turning on the wrong station.

I promote being more compassionate, but sometimes we all need tougher skins in order to learn to be forgiving.

Think about it, all the people suffering and dying and being tortured in the world and you want me to feel sorry for some "kid" (really nearly an adult) who chose that it was beyond the pale to have to listen to a prayer?

When he's 50 he probably won't even care what happened at high school graduation.

I think the time for religion is over.

Anyone reading any of the previous posts can conclude that religion is the root cause for ALL of our real problems.

Each group thinks they are right and ALL others are wrong.

You're ALL wrong. Long live secularism.

I love you all.

Having two judiciary systems can create a mess especially when it involves a Muslim and a non-Muslim. Just look at Malaysia. There was a husband who wanted custody of his son. He converted from Hinduism to Islam and converted his young son as well without his wife's permission. His wife who is still Hindu cannot be protected under the Shariah court since she is not Muslim.

Then there is another case involving an elderly disabled Buddhist man who died. His oldest son, who had converted to Islam several years earlier, claimed that his father had converted to Islam in the hospital room. The mother, who was Buddhist, had been taking care of her disabled father for the past several years, stated that her husband was not capable of making that kind of decision. The oldest son produced a document with his father's "thumb print" to prove his conversion. The wife lost her right to bury her husband of 40+ years.

The third case involved a young Hindu widow, who's husband converted to Islam (to fit in at work) without her knowledge. Upon his death, his coworkers said that he had converted to Islam. She lost her right to bury him since she was not Muslim. This and the previous case have become cases of "body snatching."

Also, in cases where the one spouse who dies was Muslim, the surviving spouse who is non-Muslim will also lose all right to the deceased's estate according to Shariah Law.

Also, in rape cases, for a woman to prove that she was raped, she has to produce four Muslim men of good standing as witnesses. The only way these four good Muslim men could have witnessed this is to actually have been there while the raped occured. Now I ask you, how could these four Muslim men be considered good if they just stood by and watched such an incident without stopping it at the first place?? And if they did, there would not have been a raped victim, wouldn't you say?

The Malaysian Civil Courts would not intervene with the Shariah Courts even though it is the Supreme Law of the land. After knowing all of these and seeing what other's go through, I think Shariah Law is just a bad idea. It's archaic, and plain discriminatory.

Anonymous,

I don't see where I disrespected her. I just repeated what I have been told in many other blogs by the Imam as well as other Muslims.

It just appears that if non-Muslims criticize the religion, they are up in arms and cite the Koran as a beneficial faith particularly to women in regards to divorce, property holding, etc.

Now that someone wants to include sharia law into the secular process, we hear a different story.

Don't you find that peculiar as well?

"here I was always told by you and others that Islam holds women in such high esteem."

gaby- please respect imam pamela and allow her to develop her thoughts and opinion. the push for islamic global dominance will not go away. as extreme fundamental islamic thought seeks to suppress criticism, she (as many other progressive, moderate muslims) risks falling under condemnation. she will need support.

I agree with what you say, keep government out of religion. Now we need to work on the reverse, keep religion out of government. That can only be done if religious leaders are kept away from, not just out of government.

In democracy the people must decide. They cannot make an informed decision when all the facts are not presented. The way things now stand, we have let religion get into the government which is like a beach head in an amphibious invasion.

The people let them in and only the people can throw them back into the sea. The weapon of mass destruction is in order.

Truth is mass destroyer of the lie. http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul combined with the enforcement of existing law, "truth in advertising" and "anti terrorist" laws already on the books should do the trick. Tell the whole 'sacred scriptures' story or none at all. And stop threatening the children with hell before their little minds mature. The partial story is the lie while hell is terror max.

Small wonder Lucifer's representatives want control of earth. After all, Lucifer tried to take over heaven, throw God out and seat Himself on God's throne. His representatives, all ministers of all faiths can hardly be expected to allow the free worship of God now can they? "Write our faith into the law of they land" they cry. Time to inform the public their ministers are selling them faith in Devil.

Hell is pure chaos. Hell's Lord, Lucifer creates chaos here on earth through His representatives. Religion in government is chaos on the silver platter. Your view is from a distance. Perhaps you will find a closer look enlightening. What do sacred scriptures really say? Is God or Devil their spiritual author?

Brambleton:

I'm not Garak, though I play one on TV.

They are not laws. They are lessons to be taken by God's reaction to these actions. Is it not appropriate to say that where God, who according to Genesis was very much a part of micromanaging life then, did not punish the perpetrator of the action he is saying that what that person did was good, and where a person was punished, that the action which caused the punishment is bad?

And what part of the New Testament do you believe refutes the story of Genesis as being the word of God?

Did God punish Noah, Abraham, Sarah, Jacob, and Joseph for their actions?

How can you say God does not condone or embrace these actions when they are right there, in the first book of the Torah/Old Testament?

The answer, you