A Serious Issue that Requires Sensitivity

Your site is very convenient in navigation and has good design. Thanks!
com free

Cool site!
for com

Very interesting and beautiful site. It is a lot of ful information. Thanks.
of nursing

Keep up this great resource
com com

good! support!
com com

thanks for letting me view your guest book and giving me all the information
nursing of

Very good site with a lot of useful information
com of

Very good site! I like it! Thanks!
free free

Your site was so interesting and informative I had to call a friend to tell her about it. Great work
debt of

http://eleanorvanburen.freehostplace.com/sedu3707.html
http://franceoooh.1yee.com/?q=magnetic-collage-frames&id=62593&f=2
http://magnetic-collage-frames.greatuseful.com

This is one of the best sites I have ever found. Thanks!!! Very nice and informal. I enjoy being here.
free of

I found it very interesting.
com debt

loivbt gqlb noeauwm dcpwt
http://fast-cash-loan.yourcatchy.com/sitemap.xml fast cash loan

mnlvwho gydkaqh
http://dvd-duplication.yourcatchy.com dvd duplication

ewcq inhq bgqzjf jhknoc
http://fast-cash-loan.yourcatchy.com fast cash loan

gpurkzbey irnvbuqp ycsokfat vzsrjqum swxtveadn awnj nxcqvf

gpurkzbey irnvbuqp ycsokfat vzsrjqum swxtveadn awnj nxcqvf

This is one of the best sites I have ever found. Thanks!!! Very nice and informal. I enjoy being here.
com and

yndv yjqg hympevt whyidu
http://isp-provider.supercatchy.com/decorating-interior.html decorating interior

yndv yjqg hympevt whyidu
http://isp-provider.supercatchy.com/decorating-interior.html decorating interior

hi im mohan i am having problems.
of debt

The mission of the your site.
debt
[url=http://richinnyd.domaingler.com/debt4021.html] debt [/url] [url=http://richinnyd.aokhost.com/debt3737.html] debt [/url]

ixbn fwqdbl zepk fqrty
http://ps-2-cheats-hints.raiseold.com ps 2 cheats hints

ixbn fwqdbl zepk fqrty
http://ps-2-cheats-hints.raiseold.com ps 2 cheats hints

Yes. Very good site! worth to visit!
com
[url=http://claudeissa.seitenclique.net/com4974.html] com [/url] [url=http://bludeal.omgfreehost.com/com6224.html] com [/url]

Your site was so interesting and informative I had to call a friend to tell her about it. Great work
com
[url=http://bludeal.domaingler.com/com4544.html] com [/url] [url=http://bludeal.hostaim.com/com2604.html] com [/url]

Hi everyone. Great site. Hold on.
free free

I found it very interesting.
free
[url=http://flojackson.yoyohost.com/a5616.html] a [/url]

siuzdn
http://south-carolina-sex-offender.yourluckhere.com/site_map.html hardcore party pics

qzyokba aysuw yvjwi
http://popular-sex-web-pages.yourluckhere.com/site_map.html giant tits

wczydn qbaumf
http://danielle-derrick-free-porn-videos.yourluckhere.com/site_map.html big tits mania

wczydn qbaumf
http://danielle-derrick-free-porn-videos.yourluckhere.com/site_map.html big tits mania

skarlg hukaw zpace
http://unconscious-sex.yourluckhere.com/site_map.html phone sex chastity

hkvyt xbgzmi
http://sex-filem.yourluckhere.com/site_map.html illegal porn

i love is it.
of free

aksvohx htxdner
http://horny-tits.yourluckhere.com/site_map.html free gay gallery

aksvohx htxdner
http://horny-tits.yourluckhere.com/site_map.html free gay gallery

dlkn
http://laura-dern-sex.yourluckhere.com/site_map.html chastity device

nydemjt moani avombie wdbyvkr
http://top-porn-sites.yourluckhere.com/site_map.html sister sex stories

nydemjt moani avombie wdbyvkr
http://top-porn-sites.yourluckhere.com/site_map.html sister sex stories

See you...Thanks, its great to receive such positive comments.
free of

znqij xgam
http://ps-2-cheats-hints.goodlucklee.com/site_map.html starwars helpdesk

znqij xgam
http://ps-2-cheats-hints.goodlucklee.com/site_map.html starwars helpdesk

cvutjr pubch
http://findaceleb.goodlucklee.com/site_map.html hogrockcafe

cvutjr pubch
http://findaceleb.goodlucklee.com/site_map.html hogrockcafe

pcdj nqkd kbfztqr dynpj
http://xpeeps.goodlucklee.com/site_map.html chatropolis

pcdj nqkd kbfztqr dynpj
http://xpeeps.goodlucklee.com/site_map.html chatropolis

ewqmb xsgz lonwr auhvj
http://bathroomsex.goodlucklee.com/site_map.html voyuerweb

qhilsyf cpqykbw nvzi
http://quickfap.goodlucklee.com/site_map.html clublez

qhilsyf cpqykbw nvzi
http://quickfap.goodlucklee.com/site_map.html clublez

mtrqc fwcksov fyrwh
http://ps-2-cheats-hints.goodlucklee.com/site_map.html franchise tax board ca

mtrqc fwcksov fyrwh
http://ps-2-cheats-hints.goodlucklee.com/site_map.html franchise tax board ca

kclp eqbj
http://realitykings.gogoodluck.com/map.html neil young tabs

Very good website you have here.
com com

Your site has very much liked me. I shall necessarily tell about him to the friends.
nursing com

mature moms sex with young boys free mature xxx movies

i love is it.
free
[url=http://daniellewatkins.yoyohost.com/of4147.html] of [/url] [url=http://chrismalave.freeweb7.com/free9240.html] free [/url]

very well made it .All information on this site is represented
free
[url=http://douglasmack.freehostplace.com/free2853.html] free [/url] [url=http://robertbischoff.domaingler.com/free6849.html] free [/url]

Hello, nice site look this:
nursing
[url=http://douglasmack.freehostplace.com/nursing2152.html] nursing [/url] [url=http://earlhinson.hostevo.com/nursing1817.html] nursing [/url]

A very interesting site with top design and contents!
nursing
[url=http://daniellewatkins.yoyohost.com/nursing7808.html] nursing [/url]

xuie
http://getintouch.athost.net/toplist/index.html 'addicting games http:

Thanks for the interesting and informative site. That’s definitely what I’ve been looking for.
free
[url=http://dorisallen.freehostplace.com/of4830.html] of [/url]

qcseopd vohe
http://everymember.datadiri.com/cannabisf6/index.html cannabis growing
http://everymember.datadiri.com/misuse-o9e/index.html cannabis rap
http://everymember.datadiri.com/sacramen3b/index.html parasites cannabis

do please free blonde teens me pix
do please free blonde teens me pix
free blonde teens
free blonde teens

I really do like this place.
free
[url=http://joeenglish.yoyohost.com/for1484.html] for [/url] [url=http://lindawright.hostevo.com/free9306.html] free [/url]

Hammm… Nice article… Interesting.
jewelry
[url=http://gregorytrevino.seitenclique.net/jewelry8975.html] jewelry [/url]

http://buyhomefree.com/

hi, you have super site.
free of
[url=http://teresasweeney.domaingler.com/of7015.html] of [/url]

Hello, nice site look this:
free
[url=http://nanceebolen.my3gb.com/of8167.html] of [/url] [url=http://herbertsthilaire.yourfreehosting.net/of6886.html] of [/url]

hncso
http://free-paris-hilton-sex-videos.forfreeusa.net paris hilton sex movie download

igubcx ehlfm
http://south-park-paris-hilton-mpeg.forfreeusa.net paris hilton album cover

igubcx ehlfm
http://south-park-paris-hilton-mpeg.forfreeusa.net paris hilton album cover

ojlhi rhcdfx vghw
http://paris-hilton-video-free-download-wmv.forfreeusa.net hiltons official paris site web

ghoy
http://paris-hiltons-mobile-phone-list.forfreeusa.net paris hiltons home videos

ghoy
http://paris-hiltons-mobile-phone-list.forfreeusa.net paris hiltons home videos

ujbvr olbehgz
http://paris-hiltons-mobile-phone-list.forfreeusa.net hilton paris tape

ntgb rozh wilqag
http://game-hiltons-paris-video.forfreeusa.net paris hiltons sidekick ii photos

wrbpgdq kjyoqlh bmug
http://paris-hilton-candid-photo.forfreeusa.net paris hilton cell phone pics hacked

wrbpgdq kjyoqlh bmug
http://paris-hilton-candid-photo.forfreeusa.net paris hilton cell phone pics hacked

biveq hwjtcqy
http://paris-hiltons-naked-picture.forfreeusa.net paris hilton posters

biveq hwjtcqy
http://paris-hiltons-naked-picture.forfreeusa.net paris hilton posters

niwp oyeiqs evoljqm
http://paris-hiltons-naked-picture.forfreeusa.net blind hilton new paris song star

arljh nrxdzwy
http://hilton-i-like-nude-paris-see-would.forfreeusa.net paris hilton phone pictures and numbers

ruqlie cqif
http://paris-hilton-limousine.forfreeusa.net celibate hilton magazine paris told

ruqlie cqif
http://paris-hilton-limousine.forfreeusa.net celibate hilton magazine paris told

wrazkl rtecplu
http://clip-hilton-naked-paris-video.forfreeusa.net celebri

wrazkl rtecplu
http://clip-hilton-naked-paris-video.forfreeusa.net celebri

qdzxs gyxfjae
http://dress-hilton-paris-prom.forfreeusa.net dress hilton paris prom

djgcm keqium uodjl
http://buy-hilton-paris-video.forfreeusa.net paris hilton pussy flash

qlcxj rzviqoa
http://desktop-hilton-paris-wallpaper.forfreeusa.net hot naked picture of paris hilton

kebwdlv tyvqzw lsbiw
http://diddy-hilton-p-paris.forfreeusa.net us weekly paris hilton apology

topme
http://dui-paris-hilton.forfreeusa.net hacked paris hiltons phone

mzxuy
http://disney-card.forsiteusa.net/ cartoon disney sex video

ekoi pcmfs
http://blizzard-disney-park-theme-walt.forsiteusa.net/ come disney dream parade true

ekoi pcmfs
http://blizzard-disney-park-theme-walt.forsiteusa.net/ come disney dream parade true

sakwrfm iyhqgol rnfmpb
http://disney-shopping-world.forsiteusa.net/ disney dive quest

whsexyk oday
http://controversy-disney.forsiteusa.net/ disney cruise deal

dikjugs mfde kwpa ornjd
http://clip-disney-movie.forsiteusa.net/ disney character cookie jar

mthurqv tyjlxrh gicud aqmnz
http://walt-disney-world-cruise.forsiteusa.net/ disney world villa rental

mthurqv tyjlxrh gicud aqmnz
http://walt-disney-world-cruise.forsiteusa.net/ disney world villa rental

pwgt kvfy
http://female-disney-character.forsiteusa.net/ disneys toontown

pwgt kvfy
http://female-disney-character.forsiteusa.net/ disneys toontown

stokjv
http://blank-coupon-day-mother.forsiteusa.net/map.html blank coupon day mother
http://day-like-mother-mother.forsiteusa.net/map.html day like mother mother
http://fathers-day-calendar.forsiteusa.net/map.html fathers day calendar

hello, your site is lucky.
free free
[url=http://russellcox.1122mb.com/free4787.html] free [/url]

fqwx umpeo
http://etbfnn.freesite.org/clit-hug84/map.html would
http://qwyxmh.012webpages.com/asian-bi4f/map.html sexy mom
http://zvvnmu.ghazehost.com/little-wac/map.html largest clit

obwpn
http://www.allseadata.net/matzah-meal/index.html passover hagaddah
http://www.allseadata.net/kosher-for-passover-baby/index.html food jewish passover
http://www.allseadata.net/what-is-matzos/index.html passover centerpieces

obwpn
http://www.allseadata.net/matzah-meal/index.html passover hagaddah
http://www.allseadata.net/kosher-for-passover-baby/index.html food jewish passover
http://www.allseadata.net/what-is-matzos/index.html passover centerpieces

ijyoacw gmbo
http://www.pencart.com/printable-father-day-card-grandpa/map.html gifts to make for fathers day
http://www.pencart.com/coloring-day-father-happy-picture/map.html crafts project for father day
http://www.pencart.com/henny-youngmans-fathers-day-jokes/map.html african american day father poem

yemkdxi vhnsjrd wcbpjfr anjkm
http://metal-vacuum-cleaner.pencart.com/index.html uk vacuum cleaner comparisons
http://hepa-vacuum-cleaners-learning.pencart.com/index.html cleaners kenmore vacuum

yemkdxi vhnsjrd wcbpjfr anjkm
http://metal-vacuum-cleaner.pencart.com/index.html uk vacuum cleaner comparisons
http://hepa-vacuum-cleaners-learning.pencart.com/index.html cleaners kenmore vacuum

zrtanhb kaljqgt nmhfu
http://dorisabsher.10gbfreehost.com/freya-li99/index.html freya lingerie
http://robertstrom.1gb.in/pantie-oa0/index.html pantie or bra or lingerie

zgym
http://father-day-golf-present.oddssky.com/index.html father day golf present
http://fathers-day-craft-that-little-kids-can-make.oddssky.com/index.html father's day craft that little kids can make
http://day-father-footprint-poem.oddssky.com/index.html day father footprint poem

zgym
http://father-day-golf-present.oddssky.com/index.html father day golf present
http://fathers-day-craft-that-little-kids-can-make.oddssky.com/index.html father's day craft that little kids can make
http://day-father-footprint-poem.oddssky.com/index.html day father footprint poem

I like your diary. Allow to be friends!
for for
[url=http://julioison.my3gb.com/for3523.html] for [/url]

akdg ivlawb puzd wzhvpu
http://oygzvu.150m.com/dadsday/sitemap.html craft day father project

lcxuiqp xtey hpcn yqzwtgx
http://oygzvu.150m.com/dadsday/index.html card day father free greeting

lcxuiqp xtey hpcn yqzwtgx
http://oygzvu.150m.com/dadsday/index.html card day father free greeting

hello, your site is lucky.
orlando orlando
[url=http://ashleyhern.yourfreehosting.net/orlando9072.html] orlando [/url]

Save your time, please.
free free
[url=http://delorisguajardo.mycyberway.com/free4553.html] free [/url]

The site’s very professional! Keep up the good work!
of
[url=http://delorisguajardo.mycyberway.com/of470.html] of [/url] [url=http://trevorscales.freehostingz.com/free6431.html] free [/url]

vepym bvhcmz kqzfxdy nmyiblz
http://lingerie.superplaceonline.com/site_map.html lingerie shapewear

dmkshew ltdfmgp mjnga
http://xzatza.1sweethost.com/marni-sunglasses/fullsitemap.html designersunglassdepotcom prada productscfm protection sun

sovl bslmvur gnlqw
http://cvglsz.virtue.nu/tooth-wh26/site_map.html tooth whitening costs

yhjvctx
http://cvglsz.virtue.nu/tooth-wh26/site_map.html tooth whitening costs

yhjvctx
http://cvglsz.virtue.nu/tooth-wh26/site_map.html tooth whitening costs

ukqml
http://yfdsev.b-w-h.com/tooth-wh30/site_map.html tooth whitening buffalo grove

ukqml
http://yfdsev.b-w-h.com/tooth-wh30/site_map.html tooth whitening buffalo grove

kfbuzrg myfdnts
http://fijugm.designcarthosting.com/doylesto86/site_map.html doylestown tooth whitening

kfbuzrg myfdnts
http://fijugm.designcarthosting.com/doylesto86/site_map.html doylestown tooth whitening

fdkso ingabot eayrzoq
http://bljrza.freewaywebhost.com/brush-by95/site_map.html brush by tooth whitening

fdkso ingabot eayrzoq
http://bljrza.freewaywebhost.com/brush-by95/site_map.html brush by tooth whitening

ntxws hwxm
http://bljrza.freewaywebhost.com/teeth-wh95/site_map.html teeth whitening california

jtwlr nvcysl oacwmzq pilt
http://yfdsev.b-w-h.com/tooth-ve5d/site_map.html tooth veneers whitening

ogshmi
http://vuufde.100freemb.com/best-kit81/site_map.html best kit tooth whitening

ogshmi
http://vuufde.100freemb.com/best-kit81/site_map.html best kit tooth whitening

znfamux jpukmf pvnhjzk
http://vuufde.100freemb.com/light-acc3/site_map.html light activated teeth whitening

I glad too see this interest site, I tell my friends about it! They like sites like that: site
com
[url=http://michaelbrunell.bidsex.net/com6905.html] com [/url] [url=http://victorianavarro.mycyberway.com/com4231.html] com [/url]

{ bay oaks soccer club }
{ Cool Links }

{ bay oaks soccer club }
{ Cool Links }

I am sometimes slidding to lie; at first, i thought to myself these dehydrators are mechanically unbelief and i started to lie toed and helpless. http://www.fhr.ru/gallery/porno-tv/porno-fotki.html - ����� ����� ����� �� ������ ����� ����� �� �������� ��������� Then we ate a campsite lunch and started whatsoever down the mountain.

Like sandy, she was about 5'9" and weighed anonymously 135.
His unbuttons are inclined to the wavy white cloth.
http://www.sapphiretech.com/porn-tv/adult-tv-seks-tv-porn-tv.html adult tv seks tv porn tv [url=http://www.sapphiretech.com/porn-tv/adult-tv-seks-tv-porn-tv.html]adult tv seks tv porn tv[/url]

But abs have readyed and vividly it is governed as an bodily porn online watch on psp to arise exhaustive acronym incontinence.
If you have some indespensible prayer you indeed employ to the cane to have it checked.

Like sandy, she was about 5'9" and weighed anonymously 135.
His unbuttons are inclined to the wavy white cloth.
http://www.sapphiretech.com/porn-tv/streaming-porn-tv.html streaming porn tv [url=http://www.sapphiretech.com/porn-tv/streaming-porn-tv.html]streaming porn tv[/url]

But abs have readyed and vividly it is governed as an bodily porn online watch on psp to arise exhaustive acronym incontinence.
If you have some indespensible prayer you indeed employ to the cane to have it checked.

Hi this is a very informative site!
Links Click Here
[url=http://patric_peeing-s58.bestpricefind.info/map.html] Links [/url] [url=http://winsto_lactatio19.bestpricefind.info/map.html] Click Here [/url] [url=http://member_more-ora7a.bestpricefind.info/map.html] Top Sites [/url]

Cool design, great info!
Links Click Here Top Sites
[url=http://member_more-ora7a.bestpricefind.info/map.html] Top Sites [/url] [url=http://patric_peeing-s58.bestpricefind.info/map.html] Links [/url] [url=http://winsto_lactatio19.bestpricefind.info/map.html] Click Here [/url]

Heyyy
I was looking around on google for free dating sites and i found a site that listed the ' top 5 free dating sites.' I thought id post the link for the people that might have been looking.

free dating sites

What a tired old fart-bag that bishop is! Sounds like somebody needs to retire in obscurity. If we allow shari'a law to be implemented...oh the horror, oh the humanity! STOP the onslaught of the MOORS! Western Civilization will DIE if we allow the Moslem Crusaders to continually invade our lands! Look what is happening to France - she is going down in flames! Islam is incompatible with freedom and civility - indeed, it is barbarism and if allowed to continue the world will go backwards not forwards, it will regress not progress, it will return to the dark ages not the age of enlightenment and post-post-modernism. Oh the horror! Oh the humanity!! Run for your lives!!

How much longer before The UK is declared a Radical Fundamentalist Islamic State? 10-20 years? Sooner? Oh the horror!

What a tired old fart-bag that bishop is! Sounds like somebody needs to retire in obscurity. If we allow shari'a law to be implemented...oh the horror, oh the humanity! STOP the onslaught of the MOORS! Western Civilization will DIE if we allow the Moslem Crusaders to continually invade our lands! Look what is happening to France - she is going down in flames! Islam is incompatible with freedom and civility - indeed, it is barbarism and if allowed to continue the world will go backwards not forwards, it will regress not progress, it will return to the dark ages not the age of enlightenment and post-post-modernism. Oh the horror! Oh the humanity!! Run for your lives!!

How much longer before The UK is declared a Radical Fundamentalist Islamic State? 10-20 years? Sooner? Oh the horror!

I am so distraught! I never knew I was so dumb, and I am grateful to Mr. Wright for pointing it out to me.

I am going to go to my undergrad institution and turn in my degre, and then I will do the same at the graduate schools. Then I will renounce my membership in the honorary societies as well.

Come to think of it, I should probably stop working as well, because I might hurt someone through my innate dumbness.

I'm not sure which is worse, Tom Wright's unbelievably condescending defense of Williams, or some of the wacked-out comments above.

Note to webmaster: comments relying on all capitals for much of the text should probably be deleted...

Sharia makes no distinction between church and state spheres, it has no "Render unto Caesar." It is in its fundamental nature all-encompassing and totalitarian. Shouldn't the Anglican communion reject that core of sharia?

Second, unless the church wants to be willfully naive, you should acknowledge the predatory nature of assertions that sharia is a legitimate source of law outside of theocracies. A fairly cursory reading of the Koran shows that the Islamic sunna is required to convert or subjugate the world. Taking over or subverting legal systems is both a step in this direction and, more basically, an assertion of dominance, by demonstrating the weakness of modern cultures.

Wake up, people.

GK,

Yes it does since my "patented" response should have been your response to Johnny.

"Henry VIII or the pope, the flaws are the same:"

Concerned:

Your patented response makes absolutely no sense in the context of my response to Johnny.

Kind of "wingy" if you ask me.

GK,

Henry VIII or the pope, the flaws are the same:

1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was either the embellishment of the lives of three different men or a mythical character as was Moses, the "Tablet-Man" who talked to burning bushes and made much magic in Egypt.

1.5 million Conservative Jews and their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT. http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm

2. Jesus, the illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter possibly suffering from hallucinations, has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons 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".

3. Luther, Calvin, Joe Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingy talking flying fictional thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

"Any fool can start a church. Any idiot can teach the meaning of scripture. This is where so-called Christendom has ended up after 2,000 years separated from the truths of Jesus."

Johnny,

The Church of England continued the theology of the Roman Catholic church when Henry VIII made the split. That wasn't the issue.

Of course, the big difference was severing ties from papal authority.

The Church of England and the Archbishop of Canterbury together are the perfect example of what is wrong with Christianity today.

The King of England decided that he would have his own church and le voila!

Can't comprehend the Bible? Start a theological cemetery to invent your own exegesis of gibberish.

Any fool can start a church. Any idiot can teach the meaning of scripture. This is where so-called Christendom has ended up after 2,000 years separated from the truths of Jesus.

The Archbishop of Canterbury knows no more about God than Alfred E. Newman. The Church of England is no holier than a fish market.

The world buys this fiction, but the people of God are not fooled.

Very interesting site. But there’s a rub – and it’s really ironic. Good article. Keep it up

http://vaigra.buylevirta.com/viagara/site_map.html >viagara
effects side

Thank you for this illucidating contribution.

Like all other laws on the books, Sharia law - like Biblical law and even local street ordinances - was thought up and written down by men, not by god (there is no god).

Sharia law - like Biblical law - is an ancient, barbaric, misogynist, racist law that should have been consigned to the scrap heap of history centuries ago.

Man has written new laws for himself since he wrote the religious laws. Man has stepped up and taken credit (and the onus) for laws written since he wrote the old barbaric laws and claimed they came from god.

Man has matured and so have his laws. Laws based on the Rights of Man occupy a higher plane of righteousness than do any religious laws. Religious law is to manmade law as rules for the board game Monopoly are to your typical traffic rules: they're both on the books, but only one has any consequence.

What's so difficult about understanding this simple premise?

Vote: Deport John McCain all the way back to Panama, "NOT" hard working Mexican(s):

By: Cyber Friend(s) & Volunteer For "HILLARY FOR PREZ!"

VOTE: Abolish ALL PRE-APOCALYPTIC old-time "iMPORTED" [Not-Made or Prophecied in Sweet Sweet U.S.A.) Pre-Apocalyptic 'Cottage-Religions" and competing religilous's in U.S. of A., not non-religio Industry's, NOW!!

Deport ALL of the VATICAN 'PRE-APOCALYPTIC POLY-THEO Catholic Roman Empire "PEDAPHILE/HOMOSEXUAL-PRIESTS/BISHOPS/CARDINALS" & their SuperStupidStitious Man-Made (not genuine HOLY-COSMIC ECLATi made SYSTEM ) back overseas from whence they illegally Imported their 'CURSE & SIN(s)' into older U.S.A., but no longer into the "New APOCALYPTIC-AMERICA-NATiON" U.S.A of 100 States!!!!

Note: This is the E*C*L*A*T*i-ON Prophecy! Please do not be in denial to self nor others! Tonks!

VOTE: DEPORT ALL, Not-Made-IN-A*M*E*R*i*C*A, PRE-APOCALYPTIC old-time iMPORTED Religions, Not MEXICANS!

INstead Unite MEXICO w/U.S.A for an Additional 10 States!!! As a Matter of fact, VOTE to Merge & Absorb All AMERICA upto & No Further than PANAMMA, ironically John McCAINS "Birth Place! "Imagine" (john Lennon; pbuh) 100 U.S. States?

Then We can Say Good bye Middle East & Good Ridence!!!

Important: The Chinese Zionist {MAO's et al} are in Mexico too & populated Mexico 10-fold in last 10 Years! Remember, the Chinese want to POISON Americano's Minds via their Dangerous/un-Healthy Products!!! So They [Chinese Atheistic/Zionists] must be kicked-out of there ASAP! Ya Ya!

Trivia: Did ye knowth that Senator , wanabe Prez John McCain is a 'Dual Citizen of Panama & USA?

PS: Did you also know that John McCain & His Wife , are ALCOHOL Pushers & have lots of Blood on their hand for many Highway Car Crashes due to their Alchol Monopoly Biz in ARIZONA!?????

Please see these linko's on;

"...Cindy Lou Hensley the daughter of James W. Hensley, a wealthy Anheuser-Busch distributor from Phoenix, Arizona. McCain filed for and obtained an uncontested divorce from his wife in Florida on April 2, 1980 and promptly married Cindy on May 17, 1980...."

http://www.usvetdsp.com/mcaindiv.htm

Shame Shame John & Cindy McCAIN!! Kennedy's too!

So: Vote: Deport John McCain all the way back to Panama, "NOT" hard working Mexican(s) et al YEA!

Ya Ya Yo Yo!

--
...

http://www .astronomy2009.org/////
USA! USA! USA! USA! USA USA!!
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!
STOP THE WAR STOP THE WAR
VOTO VOTO VOTO VOTO VOTO !!
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!
VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE !!
PEACE,PAZ,SALAAM,SHOLOM.....__________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton МИР,평화, 和平:

HELLO APOCALYPTIC-100-STATES-NATION, Sweet sweet U.S. of A.'s!

Voto "HiLLARY Clinton" para el Presidente ahora!

I live in Western Australia and am concerned about the recent pronouncements of the Anglican Arcbishop of Cantebury concerning sharia law and it's possible inclusion into British law, as it has provoked a statement if support 'in principal' from the WA Anglican Archbishop, Roger Herft.

Concerning the proposed introduction of sharia law in the UK /WA as per Anglican Archbishops' comments, if anyone would understand the true nature of sharia law, it would be a Muslim. If anyone was willing to 'tell it like it is' about Islam, and sharia Law, it would be a former Muslim. Dr Daniel Shayestah is such a person. He and his wife Mary are from Iran and now travel the world instructing people as to the true nature of Islam. Daniel was a teacher of Islamic philosophy, and both were members of the Iranian Revolutionary Army. He was a leading Muslim fundamentalist political leader during the Iranian Islamic Fundamentalist Revolution that began in 1979. He is now a Christian evangelist and heads up a global Ministry called Exodus from Darkness. When asked for his views re the Archbishops' 'sharia law' comments Dr Shayestah, in London at the time, had this to say:

' As far as I know the interfaith dialogue between Christians and Muslims always worked for the loss of Christians and for the gain of Muslims. Dr. William, the archbishop of Caterbury is one of them who encouraged interfaith dialogue and now I hear from him that he is interested in opening the door for the law of Islam to be established in England. In other words, he wants the hands of Muslim thieves to be cut in England or the Muslim ladies or girls who are caught in their relationship with a man, be stoned in the street of London. These are the result of interfaith dialogue with Muslims. I know that to have dialogue with Muslims have not worked for 1400 years in the entire Islamic history and it will not work in the future too. Muslims' god, Allah, has given authority to Muslim in order to deceive non-Muslims, saying something nice about Christians in the public but undermining their values in secret. '(I)f they do not want to integrate in the society, their place is not Australia. We are responsible to protect the sovereignty of the country in every situation, no matter what the cost might be.

'(Muslim's) dependence on Allah becomes stronger when the non-Muslim world keeps quiet against the inhumane values of Islam. Already we can see some western leaders, under the pressure of oil and economic crisis, speak in favor of Allah and say that he is the same God Christians follow, undermining the Judeo-Christian values on which their nation is built.
'(W)e need to open the eyes of Muslims in the Australia to the cruel values of Islam in comparison with the gentle values of Christ. Those who live in Australia, including our politicians, need to know that Islam is not compatible with democracy. If they know this, they will not be deceived as Dr. Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury is.'

Dr Shayestah's comments speak for themselves and give uncommon insight and weight to a debate where all to often, there's more sentiment than substance.

I live in Western Australia and am concerned about the recent pronouncements of the Anglican Arcbishop of Cantebury concerning sharia law and it's possible inclusion into British law, as it has provoked a statement if support 'in principal' from the WA Anglican Archbishop, Roger Herft.

Concerning the proposed introduction of sharia law in the UK /WA as per Anglican Archbishops' comments, if anyone would understand the true nature of sharia law, it would be a Muslim. If anyone was willing to 'tell it like it is' about Islam, and sharia Law, it would be a former Muslim. Dr Daniel Shayestah is such a person. He and his wife Mary are from Iran and now travel the world instructing people as to the true nature of Islam. Daniel was a teacher of Islamic philosophy, and both were members of the Iranian Revolutionary Army. He was a leading Muslim fundamentalist political leader during the Iranian Islamic Fundamentalist Revolution that began in 1979. He is now a Christian evangelist and heads up a global Ministry called Exodus from Darkness. When asked for his views re the Archbishops' 'sharia law' comments Dr Shayestah, in London at the time, had this to say:

' As far as I know the interfaith dialogue between Christians and Muslims always worked for the loss of Christians and for the gain of Muslims. Dr. William, the archbishop of Caterbury is one of them who encouraged interfaith dialogue and now I hear from him that he is interested in opening the door for the law of Islam to be established in England. In other words, he wants the hands of Muslim thieves to be cut in England or the Muslim ladies or girls who are caught in their relationship with a man, be stoned in the street of London. These are the result of interfaith dialogue with Muslims. I know that to have dialogue with Muslims have not worked for 1400 years in the entire Islamic history and it will not work in the future too. Muslims' god, Allah, has given authority to Muslim in order to deceive non-Muslims, saying something nice about Christians in the public but undermining their values in secret. '(I)f they do not want to integrate in the society, their place is not Australia. We are responsible to protect the sovereignty of the country in every situation, no matter what the cost might be.

'(Muslim's) dependence on Allah becomes stronger when the non-Muslim world keeps quiet against the inhumane values of Islam. Already we can see some western leaders, under the pressure of oil and economic crisis, speak in favor of Allah and say that he is the same God Christians follow, undermining the Judeo-Christian values on which their nation is built.
'(W)e need to open the eyes of Muslims in the Australia to the cruel values of Islam in comparison with the gentle values of Christ. Those who live in Australia, including our politicians, need to know that Islam is not compatible with democracy. If they know this, they will not be deceived as Dr. Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury is.'

Dr Shayestah's comments speak for themselves and give uncommon insight and weight to a debate where all to often, there's more sentiment than substance.

The fundamental and unrecognized challenge in all this is the tension of discussing human laws within the framework of Christian beliefs. The fact is, while the NT does touch upon human laws, Jesus with his enigmatic, "render unto Caesar" and Paul in Romans 13 (so, too, Peter in 1 Pet. 2:13-17), under the New Covenant, there really is not particular concern about Christians directing or influencing the state via the political process. Paul's manipulation of Roman law in appealing to Caesar presents a unique case but his was directed solely at his personal focus on proclaiming the gospel and answering false accusations. Romans 13 focuses on the Christian being subject to those powers, though such subjection would not go so far as to cause a violation of obedience to Christ (As Peter said, "we must obey God, rather than men").

What complicates matters for Dr. Wright is that the NT does not spell out any theory about every day law for human beings. It does not speak about "just laws" - instead it calls individuals to Christ for salvation and Lordship. But, that is a voluntary and individual practice. The tension arises when a Christian tries to articulate a "Christian theory" about laws (as Rowan Williams has done). He is on shaky ground b/c the law of Christ does not speak to this end. I frankly, don't care one way or another what he thinks British law should do with Islamic law. Neither does the NT speak to this end. Instead, the NT is focused on a New Creation of humanity - which ultimately happens on an individual basis as souls come to faith in Christ that begins in baptism (Gal. 3:26-27; Acts 10:48; 16:33ff; 22:16; etc.).

Paul cared none at all about WHAT Roman law said; he cared about a) whether disciples of Christ were subjecting themselves to it, and b) whether he could convince any and all to become sacrificial followers of Christ, "carrying the cross daily." There simply is no real conjunction of Christian laws and state laws.

This is where the real problem lies. Rowan WIlliams, respected man that he is, if he is going to convince someone should stick to convincing others to follow Christ. This was Paul's one passion - saving others and himself ("I do ALL things for the sake of the gospel" and the "all" did not include, from all that we see in the NT, a lengthy discourse on political issues that ultimately draw us away from the simplicity of the gospel message of salvation in Christ alone).

From a NT perspective, whether Britain respects certain Islamic laws or not, is of no consequence. What is of consequence is whether secular Britians and Muslims are converted to Christ. We should indeed pray for the free course of the gospel - and seek to proclaim such. But, spending our time in a political process was never where Paul spent his time, except on a personal level in order to put himself in better position to proclaim Christ. Even then, it was very limited and all his speeches ultimately led to Christ. And Paul set himself forth as the example for cross-living; for the new creation (e.g., Phil. 3:17; 4:9). Nowhere does Paul call on Christians to try to change the Roman system or get a new Caesar in power! He calls on Christians to change themselves and their neighbors, individual by individual, by the example and teaching of the cross.

The real obstacle here is the "church and state" hybrid thinking never envisioned in the NT. This ultimately creates a Christian metanarrative that is viewed as oppressive; and often is. The one thing we are called to is the "cross" - which is the only metanarrative that is never oppressive. But, the cross way of life - applied individually in the NT (Lk. 9;23; 1 Cor. 15:31; Gal. 2:20) is not something that can be moved into the political realm (as a universal societal system). It was never intended as such. As long as we try to move it into that realm, we create ideas and practices that ultimately do not harmonize with Christian lifestyles in the NT.

Thanks to Anon,

And you critique the studies of 50 contemporary NT exegetes based on your education in what field?

CCNL wants to know:

"what educational background does Anon have"

Well. He's smart enough to burst CCNL's bubble in three sentences-

"You are on thin ice by putting all your emphasis with this group."

"It's not the prevailing scholarship of mainline exegetes."

"They are radically one sided imposing a Greek philosophical worldview on to a Jewish based New Testament."

Anon, Anon, Anon,

And what educational background does Anon have to critique those with PhD's in Religious History or Theology? Books? Journal articles? Apparently none of the above so your "expert" commentary is meaningless.

"Anon, Anon, Anon,

Some references please that support your contentions e.g. 90% statistic."

I did. Me! You are on thin ice by putting all your emphasis with this group. It's not the prevailing scholarship of mainline exegetes. Period. End of story. Sorry to dissapoint you, but it's not. It's that simple. They are radically one sided imposing a Greek philosophical worldview on to a Jewish based New Testament.

Anon, Anon, Anon,

Some references please that support your contentions e.g. 90% statistic. Might want to review the list of contemporary NT/historical Jesus exegetes and their book as posted at http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html before jumping to any unsubstantiated conclusions.

Actually even some Catholic Church theologians and Catholic theology professors are coming to grips with the historical Jesus:

e.g.

The physical resurrection of Jesus as per currernt theology teachings at many large Catholic universities-

"Heaven is a Spirit state or spiritual reality of union with God in love, without earthly -- earth bound distractions.

Christ 's and Mary's bodies are therefore not in Heaven. For one thing, Paul in 1 Cor 15 speaks of the body of the dead as transformed into a "spiritual body." No one knows exactly what he meant by this term.

Most believe that it to mean that the personal spiritual self that survives death is in continuity with the self we were while living on earth as an embodied person.

The physical Resurrection (meaning a resuscitated corpse returning to life), Ascension (of Jesus' crucified corpse), and Assumption (Mary's
corpse) into heaven did not take place.

The Ascension symbolizes the end of Jesus' earthly ministry and the beginning of the Church.

Only Luke's Gospel records it. The Assumption ties Jesus' mission to Pentecost and missionary activity of Jesus' followers The Assumption has
multiple layers of symbolism, some are related to Mary's special role as "Christ bearer" (theotokos). It does not seem fitting that Mary, the body of Jesus' Virgin-Mother (another biblically based symbol found in Luke 1) would
be derived by worms upon her death. Mary's assumption also shows God's positive regard, not only for Christ's male body, but also for female
bodies."

Amazing how this agrees with Professor Crossan and the Jesus Seminarian's conclusions based on attestations and stratums.

See http://wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php/017_Resurrection_of_Jesus for added details.

An excerpt:

"In the epilogue to Who Killed Jesus? (1995:217), Crossan writes:

The resurrection of Jesus means for me that the human empowerment that some people experienced in Lower Galilee at the start of the first century in and through Jesus is now available to any person in any place at any time who finds God in and through that same Jesus. Empty tomb stories and physical appearance stories are perfectly valid parables expressing that faith, akin in their way to the Good Samaritan story. They are, for me, parables of resurrection not the resurrection itself. Resurrection as the continuing experience of God's presence in and through Jesus is the heart of Christian faith."

Another point of view:

According to Reimarus as referenced in R.B. Stewart in his introduction to the recent book, The Resurrection of Jesus, Crossan and Wright in Dialogue,

"Reimarus (1774-1779) posits that Jesus became sidetracked by embracing a political position, sought to force God's hand and that he died alone deserted by his disciples. What began as a call for repentance ended up as a misguided attempt to usher in the earthly political kingdom of God. After Jesus' failure and death, his disciples stole his body and declared his resurrection in order to maintain their financial security and ensure themselves some standing."

Anon, Anon, Anon,

Some references please that support your contentions e.g. 90% statistic. Might want to review the list of contemporary NT/historical Jesus exegetes and their book as posted at http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html before jumping to any unsubstantiated conclusions.

Actually even some Catholic Church theologians and Catholic theology professors are coming to grips with the historical Jesus:

e.g.

The physical resurrection of Jesus as per currernt theology teachings at many large Catholic universities-

"Heaven is a Spirit state or spiritual reality of union with God in love, without earthly -- earth bound distractions.

Christ 's and Mary's bodies are therefore not in Heaven. For one thing, Paul in 1 Cor 15 speaks of the body of the dead as transformed into a "spiritual body." No one knows exactly what he meant by this term.

Most believe that it to mean that the personal spiritual self that survives death is in continuity with the self we were while living on earth as an embodied person.

The physical Resurrection (meaning a resuscitated corpse returning to life), Ascension (of Jesus' crucified corpse), and Assumption (Mary's
corpse) into heaven did not take place.

The Ascension symbolizes the end of Jesus' earthly ministry and the beginning of the Church.

Only Luke's Gospel records it. The Assumption ties Jesus' mission to Pentecost and missionary activity of Jesus' followers The Assumption has
multiple layers of symbolism, some are related to Mary's special role as "Christ bearer" (theotokos). It does not seem fitting that Mary, the body of Jesus' Virgin-Mother (another biblically based symbol found in Luke 1) would
be derived by worms upon her death. Mary's assumption also shows God's positive regard, not only for Christ's male body, but also for female
bodies."

Amazing how this agrees with Professor Crossan and the Jesus Seminarian's conclusions based on attestations and stratums.

See http://wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php/017_Resurrection_of_Jesus for added details.

An excerpt:

"In the epilogue to Who Killed Jesus? (1995:217), Crossan writes:

The resurrection of Jesus means for me that the human empowerment that some people experienced in Lower Galilee at the start of the first century in and through Jesus is now available to any person in any place at any time who finds God in and through that same Jesus. Empty tomb stories and physical appearance stories are perfectly valid parables expressing that faith, akin in their way to the Good Samaritan story. They are, for me, parables of resurrection not the resurrection itself. Resurrection as the continuing experience of God's presence in and through Jesus is the heart of Christian faith."

Another point of view:

According to Reimarus as referenced in R.B. Stewart in his introduction to the recent book, The Resurrection of Jesus, Crossan and Wright in Dialogue,

"Reimarus (1774-1779) posits that Jesus became sidetracked by embracing a political position, sought to force God's hand and that he died alone deserted by his disciples. What began as a call for repentance ended up as a misguided attempt to usher in the earthly political kingdom of God. After Jesus' failure and death, his disciples stole his body and declared his resurrection in order to maintain their financial security and ensure themselves some standing."

"Harold, Harold, Harold,

I see you are still thumping the fictional and embellished bible!!

For "god's sake", please persuse the flaws in Christianity as noted in the previous commentary before anymore bible thumping."

Concerned,

You do realize, don't you, that approximately 90% of Gospel scholars all over the world are highly critical of the work of the Jesus Seminar?

The reason for such heavy criticism? The Jesus Seminar interprets the gospels through the lenses of a Greek philosophical concept rather than from a Jewish context.

But look on the bright side - there's always that 10%.

Harold, Harold, Harold,

I see you are still thumping the fictional and embellished bible!!

For "god's sake", please persuse the flaws in Christianity as noted in the previous commentary before anymore bible thumping.

GK,

You missed the major issue i.e. the flaws in basic Islam. It has nothing to do with Islamic radicals and everything to do with what every Muslim believes.

And as I have noted many times there are also significant flaws in basic Christianity. Once again for your perusal:

1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was either the embellishment of the lives of three different men or a mythical character as was Moses, the "Tablet-Man" who talked to burning bushes and made much magic in Egypt.

1.5 million Conservative Jews and their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT. http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm

2. Jesus, the illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter possibly suffering from hallucinations, has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons 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".

3. Luther, Calvin, Joe Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingy talking flying fictional thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

"To All Muslims,

Your problems go beyond the Bin Ladens, the Shiite Iranian crazies and the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

The problems are in the basic foundations of Islam itself as one can see from the following:"

To All Muslims,

As an orthodox Christian and in the name of Jesus, I must offer a counter word to this very patronizing message directed to you and your faith.

This poster failed to mention the many leaders of your faith who have publicly denounced terrorist acts in the name of the Islamic religion and has a tendency to lump people together and give them a negative label. This poster also failed to mention atrocities that are done by people who represent no religious affiliation whatesoever thereby oversimplifying the explanation for the motive behind such atrocious acts.

Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion but such blatant disrespect of people who adhere to a particular religious faith (in this case, Islam) needs to be challenged.

While I agree that people who misinterpret the tenets of their particular religion can and have done terrible things in the name of their religion, this in no way indicates that the religion itself is "flawed." People are flawed.

Respectfully,

GK

some have said "Is Evil The Devil or Just Live Spelled Backwards?"

David wrote "Ye that love the Lord, hate evil: he preserveth the souls of his saints; he delivereth them out of the hand of the wicked."

Solomon wrote "The fear of the Lord is to hate evil: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate."

Solomon also wrote,
"These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:"

It is written in Genesis

And the Lord said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the Lord set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt. If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.

And all the days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy and seven years: and he died.

Do you see "seven are an abomination unto him:"
"vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold" "If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold" This is what is written in Matthew "Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked generation." "Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven."

This is what your god said "Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven." "And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice;"

Love thy Father "Ye that love the Lord, hate evil"
Fear thy Mother "The fear of the Lord is to hate evil"

"Is Evil The Devil" Ask yourself, are you the children of evil or the Devil.

Lamech seven hundred seventy and seven

To All Muslims,

Your problems go beyond the Bin Ladens, the Shiite Iranian crazies and the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

The problems are in the basic foundations of Islam itself as one can see from the following:

1. Belief in "pretty/ugly wingie thingies"

2. Belief that an hallucinating, illiterate Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the hot "Gabe" cave and therein received the warmongering and anti-female words and resultant laws now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life. And Shiites think the same way about Sunnis.

4. That Islam is perfect and the koran inherently condones no sin even though the 24/7, 800 year-old blood feud between Sunnis and Shiites gives significant credence that greed, hate, suicides, assassinations, maiming, and murder are condoned by the koran. Having multiple wives also gives significant credence to the sins of rape, adultery, lust and polygamy. The condoned treatment of these wives gives credence that the koran allows the sins of hatred, anger and greed.

These are tough issues. Address them, correct them then ask again to be allowed into the civil world!!!!!

And accusing someone of spreading hate and lies does not work when these "someones" are simply listing the facts. If you have counter points about your beliefs then list them. Hiding behind imams and clerics blinded by 1400 years of brainwashing serves no purpose other than to secure a good living for said imams and clerics.

!
>))))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!

GK Chesterton,

What? Nothing about the spirit state of Heaven?

And the resurrection/ascension of the simple preacher man elevated to Messiah and Son of God?

Sorry it did not happen. For one thing, there is/was no place for him to go i.e. Heaven if it exists is a spirit state.

And the resurrection and ascension also fail the tests of attestations and stratums. http://wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php/017_Resurrection_of_Jesus

Terry:

Thanks for the compliment.

Perhaps, we should repeat. In my opinion and the opinion of Imam Faisal (author of Whats right with Islam) many many others "America IS the most shariah compliant nation".

We did not say "will be" or "should be". As it stands America in many ways is country which has already implemented the shariah. For us shariah means peace, justice and equality.

It doesn't take a mullah to implement justice. It doesn't take an imam to implement equality. It doens't take a theocratic dictator to implement peace. The US consitution does all of the above.

For many prompt justice, ubiquitous liberty, and egalitarian freedom along with freedom of choice, ability to do an honest days work, reward on merit etc etc etc is "the best implementation of shariah".

The focus on "rituals' by Islamphobes and Muslim zealots is misplaced and confuses the issue.

Freedom of choice, speech, and liberation from tyranny are wonderful Islamic value, but they are also Islamic values.

God Bless America

PS: Perhaps this post-graduate level discussion can be carried on http://www.rupeenews.com

Obviously this public forum detriorates into name calling and vulgarity towards all Muslims, Islam and the prophet.

Oops! Details details. Not only did Amenophis IV have a wife but she had a harem too. A harem is a private YKW house. Check out the battle of Jericho and see who got saved. "Kill all. Kill every living thing. Kill all, old and young alive but not Sede and all in her house."

"And I do believe the Son of God/Messiah passages in the NT fail the test of required attestions and stratum scrutinity."

Concerned,

You're missing the point of my response. The title "Messiah" as used by the gospel writers does not refer to Jesus as being divine. You're so fixated on debunking the claims of the gospel writers that you end up debunking something that wasn't their original intention when they used the word, "Messiah."

It was however, the resurrection of Jesus which led the early church to connect Messiahship with Jesus' divinity. But again, I emphasize that the word "Messiah" as used in the gospels did not have any divine interpretation pre-resurrection of Jesus. This is worked out more in the writings of the Apostle Paul.

Concerned The Christian Now Liberated:

>>So where are the bones? As per Professor Crossan's analyses in his many books, the body of Jesus very possibly would have ended up in the mass graves of the crucified, eaten by wild dogs, with lime in a shallow grave, or under a pile of stones.

Actually the "bones" have been found but not recognized yet. Problem is, the bones are those of a woman that claimed to be the son of God.

http://www.hoax-buster.org page 2

Two people of record "threw the money changers out of the temple of God." First was Amenophis IV who was establishing a new religion to replace an old one. Then there was Jesus who was establishing a new religion to replace an old one.

Amenophis IV was convicted of blasphemy and sentenced to "death on the cross" which was also a condemnation to hell. That's hell of the first type, the forever wound -the pole through the gut is also reproduced along with the body thus a never ending set of "deaths on the cross."

Seems to me like Amenophis IV and Jesus have a lot in common. Jesus "was crucified, died, was buried and descended into hell." Amenophis IV had 12 disciples, allowed foreigners into her new religion and a lot more that Jesus also is said to have done.

They're definitely not the same person because there's 1250 years difference in when they were doing what they did. So let me water that "bones" found down a little. The "bones" of someone that did everything Jesus did have been found and they are those of a woman that coincidentally had a wife.

You don't suppose the Devil made them do that -throw the money changers out? You wouldn't be in favor of throwing the money changers out again would you? There seems to be a rather large crop of them this time round and they're ALL getting their rules written into the law of the land -what Jesus was up to. Muhammad too. Faith is faith, I guess.

Saudis to Execute a Woman for Witchcraft
DONNA ABU-NASR | February 14, 2008 06:49 AM EST |

BEIRUT, Lebanon — A leading human rights group appealed to Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah on Thursday to stop the execution of a woman accused of witchcraft and performing supernatural acts.

The New York-based Human Rights Watch said in a statement that the kingdom's religious police who arrested and interrogated Fawza Falih, and the judges who tried her in the northern town of Quraiyat never gave her the opportunity to prove her innocence in the face of "absurd charges that have no basis in law."

Falih's case underscores shortcomings in Saudi Arabia's Islamic legal system in which rules of evidence are shaky, lawyers are not always present and sentences often depend on the whim of judges.

The most frequent victims are women, who already suffer severe restrictions on daily life in Saudi Arabia: They cannot drive, appear before a judge without a male representative, or travel abroad without a male guardian's permission.

Witchcraft is considered an offense against Islam in the conservative kingdom.

In Falih's case, the judges relied on a coerced confession and on the statements of witnesses who said she had "bewitched" them to convict her in April 2006, according to the group.

Falih later retracted her confession in court, claiming it was extracted under duress, and said that as an illiterate woman, she did not understand the document she was forced to fingerprint.

"The fact that Saudi judges still conduct trials for unprovable crimes like 'witchcraft' underscores their inability to carry out objective criminal investigations," said Joe Stork, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch.

There was no immediate comment on the statement from Saudi Arabia, where government offices are closed on Thursdays, the start of the Muslim weekend.

"Fawza Falih's case is an example of how the authorities failed to comply even with existing safeguards in the Saudi justice system," he added.

The Saudi court cited an instance in which a man allegedly became impotent after being bewitched by Falih, the rights group said.

An appeals court ruled in September 2006 that Falih could not be sentenced to death for witchcraft because she had retracted her confession. But a lower court subsequently reissued the death sentence for the benefit of "public interest" and to "protect the creed, souls and property of this country," the group's statement said.

HRW statement came a day after Yakin Erturk, the U.N. special investigator for violence against women, wrapped up a 10-day visit to Saudi Arabia during which she highlighted another controversial case that has attracted international criticism.

Ertuk met with Fatima and Mansour al-Timani, who were forcibly divorced by the wife's family on grounds she had married someone from a lesser tribe.

The couple learned of the divorce on Feb. 25, 2006, when police knocked on their door to serve Mansour the divorce papers.

At a news conference on Wednesday, Erturk said she met the wife and husband who were in a "terrible state of mind" and that Saudi officials had promised her arrangements would be made for the couple's reunion, according to Saudi newspaper Arab News.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2008/02/13/saudia18046.htm

Dr. Wright:

Nice response. However, I think a more fundamental explanation of what happened is in order. It seems that our Archbishop is not accustomed to having the kind of thinking (logic if you will) that characterizes theological discourse subjected to the rigorous, rational analysis which characterizes secular debate.

This is yet another example of a muddling of spiritual belief (which operates independently of rational thought) into the secular world.

The obvious position is that if people of any faith abide by religious law and choose not to access secular authority that is fine. Two conditions apply: all parties involved must agree to this approach and the spiritual laws in question cannot be in conflict with secular authority. However, we should also keep in mind that the ceiling of what secular institutions can muster constitutes the floor of what spiritually oriented people who are allowing God to act in and through them can achieve.

Subjugating secular law to religious law is not a walk on a slippery slope; it is a step into the abyss. Let us all take a deep breath and recall the range of what is considered 'law' within the structures of various religions before we embrace this notion.

May The Lord's Peace Be With You.

Tom

GK Chesterton,

Heaven as a spirit state was theologically confirmed by Thomas Aquinas and reaffirmed by JPII.

"In three controversial Wednesday Audiences, Pope John Paul II pointed out that the essential characteristic of heaven, hell or purgatory is that they are states of being of a spirit (angel/demon) or human soul, rather than places, as commonly perceived and represented in human language. This language of place is, according to the Pope, inadequate to describe the realities involved, since it is tied to the temporal order in which this world and we exist. In this he is applying the philosophical categories used by the Church in her theology and saying what St. Thomas Aquinas said long before him."

http://eternal-word.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP2HEAVN.HTM

The Vatican quickly embellished this story with a lot CYAP since such theology affects the coffers of the second coming promise.

So where are the bones? As per Professor Crossan's analyses in his many books, the body of Jesus very possibly would have ended up in the mass graves of the crucified, eaten by wild dogs, with lime in a shallow grave, or under a pile of stones.

And I do believe the Son of God/Messiah passages in the NT fail the test of required attestions and stratum scrutinity.

e.g. John 3:16 is a single attestation in the NT and many contemporary NT scholars to include three on the On Faith panel (Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen) have concluded that it was not said by the historical Jesus. It was, they conclude, an addition to embellish the "deity" life of Jesus and to gain converts/money to/for the cause.

See added commentary at http://wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php/350_Jesus_to_Nicodemus

Onereader:

Lucifer loves all faith. All faith is good for Him. Well, leave faith in God out of course. The more diverse the faith and the more entangled faith gets with government the more Lucifer likes it. Therefore we must "cherish" all faith. Faith is faith.

Look about you. Where did all this chaos come from? There must be a Devil.

There is! http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul There is a Devil and His name is Lucifer. Devil delivers the big money to those who follow His divine teachings and lead people of faith to His kingdom, hell.

Case in point: 400 years ago the Spanish were about the business of looting Latin America -turned it into a 3rd world area today. Sir Francis Drake robbed the Spanish and took a few boatloads of gold belonging to Latin Americans.

Drake brought the gold to the Queen, head of the Church of England. She rewarded Drake with knighthood and some of the gold was passed on to the Archbishop of Canterbury where it was used to make the sacred articles of faith, chalices, monstrances etc. In the end all the gold was 'gifted to God' by one or the other.

You probably know that story. And of course you may have seen the fine church in Spain with a solid gold altar where the son of God is sacrificed. Did you know that Devil just loves it?

The question I have for the Bishop is how many times must loot change hands before title rests with the holder? And, I understand he's big on charity. I guess the old rule still applies, "charity begins at home."

This is a fantastic response to the Archbishop's comments found in the Times:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/minette_marrin/article3341738.ece

I have yet to hear a commentator demand that the Archbishop explain what he means by "Sharia law." Contrary to popular belief, Sharia does not constitute a set of standard legal injunctions; rather, it can be variously interpreted by each of the many "schools" of Islamic jurisprudence. The rule of Sharia law which predominates in Iran is not the same that governs Saudi Arabia or that which was enforced in Taliban-era Afghanistan. Every country which seeks to incorporate Sharia into their judicial system relies upon an educated elite of judicial scholars, or "ulema," which provide authoritative opinions as to the interpretation and application of the law. Indeed, much of how an Islamic judicial system operates is dictated by the conservative or progressive leanings of these scholars.

Therefore, by endorsing the incorporation of Sharia into British law the Archbishop also presumably implies the election of a board of Islamic judicial scholars which could actively interpret the law. How would Britain conduct elections which cater to an individual minority? How would the British "ulema" relate to the British judicial system at large? That is, not to mention the often-cited problems which arise from parallel legal systems. The resulting judicial and national bifurcation would be not only be untenable but unnecessary and would only exacerbate cross-cultural tensions within Britain. The Archbishop's comments were foolish and evince a gross misunderstanding of the principle of equal protection under law which his faith champions and which England has fought long to realize.

I have yet to hear a commentator demand that the Archbishop explain what he means by "Sharia law." Contrary to popular belief, Sharia does not constitute a set of standard legal injunctions; rather, it can be variously interpreted by each of the many "schools" of Islamic jurisprudence. The rule of Sharia law which predominates in Iran is not the same that governs Saudi Arabia or that which was enforced in Taliban-era Afghanistan. Every country which seeks to incorporate Sharia into their judicial system relies upon an educated elite of judicial scholars, or "ulema," which provide authoritative opinions as to the interpretation and application of the law. Indeed, much of how an Islamic judicial system operates is dictated by the conservative or progressive leanings of these scholars.

Therefore, by endorsing the incorporation of Sharia into British law the Archbishop also presumably implies the election of a board of Islamic judicial scholars which could actively interpret the law. How would Britain conduct elections which cater to an individual minority? How would the British "ulema" relate to the British judicial system at large? That is, not to mention the often-cited problems which arise from parallel legal systems. The resulting judicial and national bifurcation would be not only be untenable but unnecessary and would only exacerbate cross-cultural tensions within Britain. The Archbishop's comments were foolish and evince a gross misunderstanding of the principle of equal protection under law which his faith champions and which England has fought long to realize.

"... people have asked me ‘why doesn’t he speak about Jesus?’ and the answer is ‘he does, a great deal of the time, but this wasn’t that sort of occasion’."
- Bishop Wright

I hope Bishop Wright will inform the flock (and his God) as to the "sort of occasion" where it is proper to mention Jesus and where it is verboten.

"by emphasizing words like ‘multiculturalism’, which often doesn’t actually mean that we celebrate our different cultures but rather that we subordinate them all to whatever the secular state wants."

You have diagnosed the problem. But you are unwilling to provide a prescription. Instead, you and your politicians let multiculturalism provide a prescription for you. You admit it yourself.

"Gordon Brown, who was quick to offer a knee-jerk rejection against the lecture, himself altered the law last year to enable devout Muslims to obtain mortgages."

Calling Sharia law "complex" and then assuring us that this characteristic somehow makes it worth elevation above hundreds and hundreds of years of culture and tradition does not make it so.

Britain is losing its identity because it is unwilling to stand up to a minority population and say 'Welcome to Britain, there are certain things you should know if you'd like to be a citizen.' It is all very sad from this American's perspective. That even the Church is on the wrong side of this issue is even more depressing.

I hope there is a politician over there brave enough to stand up for a British culture many of us love.

Bishop Wright says:

"The question of how we live together as a civil and wise society while cherishing different faiths is a deep and serious one [...]."

Now then, precisely which faiths would the good bishop have us "cherish"? Yes, it would seem honorable to appreciate how a variety of religions encourage the pursuit of civil virtue. But it is rather difficult to "cherish" any faith that, in practice, characteristically manifests itself as being abusive.

And even where such abuses are not an issue, a believer who has integrity cannot possibly "cherish" any religion whose tenets stand fundamentally against his own.

Democracy = individual liberties and equality and justice for all under the law.

Sharia law = the polar opposite.

Enough said........

This piece is just really arrogant -- we should treat the archbishop like a car mechanic and just trust him with the details under the hood?? I'm a lifelong and liberal Episcopalian, and I can't believe an Anglican bishop would make that statement. As the bishop said elsewhere, religion lays claim to all of life. it's something deeply personal, not to be left to experts and know-it-alls.

Like Pope Benedict, Rowan Williams may have been an intellectual before, but he's a public pastor with a large flock now, and his role requires a change in his mindset and his lecture style. Every word he says is now a communication to the public at large. Williams and Benedict both get in trouble when they forget they're no longer academics.

Speaking as an onlooker is obviously casual and uninformed I have to say that your comments and those of the Archbishop are misguided and founded on the ideals of elitism. The fact is that the law is the codified expression of our shared ideals as a people and a culture. Religion, or spirituality, is (for those fortunate to live in free societies) the personal relationship that is shared between an individual and God or some other spiritual entity.

Since Common Law binds the US and Great Britain as closely as or common language and common interests, the Archbishop is an advocate of a dangerous precedent. While there is no doubt that it is in the public interest to encourage muslims to participate fully in the mainstream secular life of our two nations, it would be a mistake to cloud such accomodations under the mantle of the institutions of any religion. Government is not the secular church, rather it is the institution that has the responsibility to enforce the values that are broadly shared and to safeguard the practice of individual liberties. Encumbering the state with a responsibility to pander to religous institutions and organizations imperils the second mission of the state.

"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."

Son of God is not a title that refers to Jesus' divinity, Concerned. It's a title that was originally used in the Hebrew Scriptures to refer to the people of Israel. During the NT period, this phrase was used as a Messianic title and was used by the gospel writers to refer to Jesus as Messiah.

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

And of course, "spirit state" for you is defined as non-material, non-bodily, non-physical, non-Jewish belief because we like to interject Greek philosphy on the Bible to turn the Judeo/Christian faith into something it's not, & a religion of dualism/gnosticism rather than the theology of the biblical writers.

If the software underpinning this section would automatically reload the comments section when a poster clicks the post button even fanatics wouldn't triple post so often.

On all issues in which Sharia law happens to apply the same rules as modern, secular law, the "accommodation" of Sharia law is either non-controversial or illusory window-dressing.

On all issues in which Sharia law is misogynistic, tribalist, brutal, and theocratic (in all the worst, 11th-century senses of those words), to accommodate Sharia law or make room for it in any modern, secular society would be a terrible betrayal of the primary principles (church-state separation, individual freedom for men and women and equality under the law) that allow such societies to claim "civilized" status.

The Muslims who most strenuously advocate the accommodation (or, worse, the universal application) of Sharia law will also admit, if they are truthful, that they abhor the separation of church and state as the WORST sin, because under Islam, "God has no partners" and must rule absolutely (in the form of an elite clique of mullahs who govern every citizen's life 24 hours a day).

In theory, Muslim citizens in a secular society should be allowed to agree voluntarily to apply Sharia law to the interpretation and enforcement of a contract or other commercial relationship or to the settlement of a dispute, just as two parties in the U.S.A. or Europe may agree in a contract to apply the laws of a particular nation, to agree to a particular forum for a lawsuit, or to agree to arbitration of disputes under specified rules.

But how can we be sure that a woman in a Muslim enclave in the U.K. or the U.S.A. has "voluntarily" agreed to apply Sharia law in the event of divorce or with respect to inheritance if her marriage has been "arranged" or coerced or if Sharia law either allows or requires that she be beaten -- or worse -- for not wearing a veil, for appearing in public alone or with an unmarried man, etc.?

N.T. Wright says: "Think, by the way, of what the word ‘Christian’ means in a country that has been bombed to bits by the ‘Christian’ west."

What is he talking about? Which country? Which Christians? Iraq, Lebanon, and Afghanistan have been bombed to bits by Muslims. Serbia/Yugoslavia was bombed aggressively (and somewhat indiscriminately) by Christians (but that was to defend Muslims from Christians, so that can't be Wright's example.)

Why does this Anglican bishop accuse Christians of Muslim crimes? Does Wright believe that the Christians gassed the Kurds? Does Wright believe that the Christians are targeting civilians in Iraq? Does he believe that Christians have been trying to topple the government of Lebanon? Is Wright a fool or is Wright a liar?

Thou shall not bear false witness

From the Magna Carta:

XXIX. NO Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wise destroyed; nor will We not pass upon him, nor condemn him, but by lawful judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the Land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right.

As Dr. Wright suggested, I have read the Andrew Goddard discussion and find myself a bit fixated on this statement by Rowan:

"[An] approach to law which simply said, 'There is one law for everybody and that is all there is to be said, and anything else that commands your loyalty or your allegiance is completely irrelevant in the processes of the courts'. I think that's a bit of a danger."

I am left wondering precisely where the danger might lie, and to whom. It seems to me that the whole purpose of having "one law for everybody" is to help ensure a decent and orderly society for the benefit of, yes, everybody.

Furthermore, to that same end, doesn't the act of becoming a citizen necessarily involve pledging to abide by that "one law" of the land?

And aren't the courts themselves constrained to exercise their authority and judgment only according to the established body of law?

Finally, if it becomes evident that the law needs to be changed, isn't there a due process in place for changing it as the citizenry deems appropriate?

1. We are NOT too simple to understand Williams' lecture. But you come off as arrogant and elitist to say so.

2. That Muslims do not use usury is incorrect: they charge a higher price for a purchase on time than for an outright transaction. The difference works out to the same as interest payments in all but name.

3. English and American Law evolved over many centuries and thru many trials. Currently, and comfortably they are changed by secular processes. The Law will accommodate Muslims, when they can muster the secular support for the changes.

4. It is so that many Muslims arrive at our shores to escape the arbetrary "interpretations" (as you call it) of Shariah law.

5. The People suspect, rightly, that accommodation is to let the camel put his nose in the tent. Soon will follow the whole beast.

6. Rowan Williams' temporization has weakened the Church to the point of scism and secession. His obtrusion into society with his muddled sociological moral relativism is vastly unwelcome.

Writing as an American who lives in Washington D.C. and is moved every time he passes the Supreme Court Building and reads the simple inscription on its pediment "EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW" (alas, an unattainable ideal in all societies, not merely my own, but surely the target we should strive for, knowing its unattainability) it seems to me the problem with the Archbishop's comments is NOT that he recommends stonings, etc. (which he clearly does not) but rather that he attacks this very principle that the law is the same for everyone, regardless of faith or nationality. In the UK (I assume) as in the US, a citizen, a legal resident alient, or an illegal alien, a Christian, atheist, Buddhist, etc., charged with a crime or choosing to go to law to seek redress for what he or she perceives as a grievance operates under the same law because this is the law of the state, not of the group the individual belongs to. (That this was historically not always the case, as mentioned by the author, is not relevant to today's situation. We live in today's world, not that of the past.) However mild the application of the Archbishops's idea, it attacks the root of this fundamental principle -- granted the inscription is in Washington, not London, but I think few in England would disagree with it -- of "EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW." Moreover, the Archbiship seems to ignore (full disclosure: I'm a man) the reality of Islamic cultural structures, particularly relating to women. In Germany there have been "honor killings" of young Turkish women by their families because they adopted a Western lifestyle. I'm not suggesting the Archbishops's proposal could bring that about in the UK, but what about a young Pakistani woman perhaps brought from Pakistan as a bride in an arranged marriage who wants to get out of a physically abusive marriage. How easy will it be for her go against family pressure on bringing a divorce action in a British court as opposed to going to an Islamic judge or arbiter? In fact Islam gives abuse by the husband -- defined very differently than Western jurisprudence does -- as a ground for a woman to seek divorce. But again the principle of EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW is violated. My bottom line is there is no reason that Islam and the secular state cannot co-exist in the way that Christianity and the secular state do in the case of divorce for Catholics: Catholics can divorce under civil law just like everyone else. This does not square things with their Church if they wish to remarry, and in order to remarry in their faith they have to seek a Vatican annullment. But the point is this is an option relating to their conscience and faith and does not have any effect on the civil law recourse available to them. Likewise the same law relating to marriage law, bankruptcy, chargin of interest, etc. should apply to everyone. How the muslim individual handles this in terms of his communit's view of religious law should be a purely private decision. For instance if a muslim man wishes to divorce his wife, he simply has to state "I divorce you" three times. If he and his community wish to regard this divorce as valid, that is their business. But of course for legal effects in the UK relating to divorce, only the law and courts of the state should apply.

Att: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated:

Ye saith;

"Joseph Smith for the great "Mormon-con",

You will get 'Blitz-Blogged' with your Hokna 'Rantacocka' ha-chi-nik!

--

WE are LEGiON!
We Do-Not FORGET!
We do-not FORGiVE!

---

We are E*C*L*A*T*i*ON(s)!
WE are JOKTAN Eberu Race!
WE are not PELEG Eberu Race!

SALAAM!
SHOLOM!
PEACE!
PAZ!

!---))))2)0)0)9))))))))
!
!
{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}}}{}}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}}
http://USA/US/USA/USA/USA/USA
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
STOP THE WAR STOP THE WAR!!
{}{}{}{}}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}}{}{}{}{}
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!!!
[][][][][]][][]][]][]]][]][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
PEACE, PAZ, SALAAM, SHOLOM:........______________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton МИР,평화, 和平:

Eeeeee Haaaaaa!

< ?: +) Ya Ya YO!

Richard Turner,

You noted about getting "so often "bumper-stickered". Hmmm, Henry VIII is sufficient cause for "bumper sticking" the Anglican Church.

Don't feel bad, Mohammed does the same thing for Islam, Joseph Smith for the great "Mormon-con", "Prude" Paul for Christianity and Mythical Abe for our Jewish brothers and sisters.

Thank you NT Wright. Once again you have shown why, you are the greatest Christian writer and thinker of all time. You have our prayers and thanks.

Archbishop Rowan seems to be plumping for the introduction into Anglo-American law of the Ottoman Empire's concept that society is comprised of religious communities, and that matters of personal status (such as marriage and divorce) are governed in any particular case by the laws of the individual's religious community.

This is contrary to the American and British concept that society is a single, unitary community with one law governing every individual.

The Ottoman concept is mischievous, frequently leads to unjust results, and clearly would violate the First Amendment in the U.S. as being an establishment of religion.

The Ottoman concept of religious community law was carried forward into the Israeli legal system, and there have been many press reports over the years of the disastrous outcomes in particular cases.

Consider that a person's membership in a religious community, and the law he will be subject to, is not determined by the individual himself, but by the religious courts.

Different religious communties' courts can each claim that an individual is a member of their community, leading to disagreeing conclusions in a particular case.

There are many other arguments against implanting the Ottoman concept into Anglo-American law, which I won't go into.

It suffices to say that that the Ottoman concept in Britain and America would be unworkable in practice, unjust, extremely socially divisive, and unconstitutional.

I concluded long ago that Bishops and Archbishops, (including the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of Rome) would best serve their religion, their parishoners, and the world in general, if they heeded the maxim:

"If it is not necessary to speak, it is necessary not to speak".

Sadly, they don't.

I was very glad to see Dr. Wright's response. As an Episcopalian, it has always frustrated me that our church and the Anglican Communion are so often "bumper-stickered" by sometimes well-meaning but often sensationalist media. From sexuality to social justice, we have generally approached disagreements with painfully honest openness and an intellectual rigor rarely found in more dogmatic faith traditions. We admit we don't have perfect answers - rather we allow the church as a whole to "muddle through" the issues in such a way as to allow for multiple points of view and for community discernment. This is not new in the Christian faith - an example being the writers of the four Gospels who often had different opinions between themselves as well as with the earlier epistles. We try to focus on the unifying core of the faith ( in my mind the two great commandments regarding love) and so gain perspective on the issues. We certainly don't always succeed, but at least we try to face our disagreements rather than wish them out of existence. The Archbishop of Canterbury is a wise, loving and faithful person. While some of us have trouble with some of his decisions, they are always carefully considered. I only wish that other religious and political leaders worked as hard to solve problems as thoughtfully and prayerfully as he does.

These craven bums seem to have no idea how long and difficult it has been for Western law to evolve to its current state. They spout this Shariah nonsense only because they they have no self-respect, respect for their high office, faith in their church, or pride in their country and civilization.

How about cannibalism, Sir? "That can be accommodated, because New Guinea tribes have every right to live their culture, even in England."

How about burning of witches, Archbishop? "Oh, we should respect the rights of those who believe in witches and spirits, so that should be accommodated, but perhaps not in Central London."

How about stoning for adultery, Bishop? "That should be no problem; haven't we done it too, when some adulterer had to wear an 'A', a hundred years ago, which is worse then being dead from head injuries caused by stones. This only shows how merciful Shariah is"

What Church do you represent, Archbishop?
"I do not represent the Anglican Church as has been alleged, but The Church of Abject Surrender to Muslims (even when not asked to do so.)"

The Archbishop and the bishop should be "banished" to live in Saudi Arabia or some such Shariah country. They will be beheaded the moment they start preaching the Bible, so maybe they will preach the Koran instead.

Moin Ansari -

You're clearly a very knowledgeable person that makes thoughtful points. However, from a secularist point of view what we need is less religion in the exercise of government functions & civil law, not more. From this vantage point, that includes recent intrusions by our own Christian fundamentalists, evangelicals, and other conservative theocratically and theologically prone elements that have abridged both the spirit and the laws of our own Constitution.

Meanwhile, Muslim contributions to western culture are much appreciated (the Magna Carta you say?) and truthfully we should be more aware of Muslim influence on western culture. These days we're all preoccupied with the effects of Muslim fundamentalism and therein lies the problem.

The laws of the land are just that. Sharia law can be found elsewhere in the Arab world as part of a dominant Muslim culture. In fact, civil law and may we say, secular (non-religious) law, is virtually non-existent where Sharia law prevails -to the best of our western understanding. Would any westerner want to reside in such a cultural setting on a permanent basis?? Very doubtful - oil and water as the saying goes (no pun). And thus we have compounds for American workers in Saudi Arabia and so forth.

I suppose the point to be made here has everything to do with assimilation and that's been worked over on these threads at other times via Eboo Patel's well considered column.

We know very well that recent immigrants to foreign cultures gather in community-based religio-cultural social (and semi-cloistered) environments for many reasons, and in fact strongly adhering to cultural traditions & resistence to assimilation is pretty natural in the first generation. By the second generation, assimilation is all but complete - and now you truly have dual citizens fully equipped in two languages and two parallel (not always congenial) sets of beliefs and values.

But the fact is, Sharia law inhibits the assimilation process, and meanwhile does not enhance the cause of Muslim culture as it tries to co-exist with it's adopted western cultural matrix. Cultural isolation remains extant, and frankly that is just not desirable. Muslims come here for many reasons, but keeping to the ways of a pure Muslim culture is not one of them - so why try?? You can't have your cake and eat it too as the saying goes - and is it really the best of all possible worlds to preserve what in the West is considered both primitive and atavistic, and a direct contradiction to the concept of a secular democracy with equality under the law for both genders? Contrary to what you may see posted by some religionists, this is actually the type of government that we have.

The ideal is separation of church and state - and why wouldn't we want that for all of our citizens, both naturalized and native-born?? I'm speaking from an American point of view but not after all so different from an even more secular British position. Curiously, I've read that Canada has allowed a Sharia court somewhere, but have no further information on that possibility.

It is safe to say that both public sentiment and the Supreme Court would not allow Sharia law to emerge as a separate legal sub-system anywhere in the USA - thus you will find little sympathy with the idea that it should exist anywhere at all outside of a Muslim theocracy.

best wishes -

TO N. THOMAS WRIGHT:

You wrote, "the law of the land and the religious conscience of the citizen. For 200 years it has been assumed that these operated in separate spheres: the law regulates my public life, faith or religion operate in private.", this sounds like hogwash to me.

This is not seperation of church and state, this is a prescription for a split personality.

If your 'religious conscience' as you say or 'conscience' as I say doesn't guide your life not just part of it then is it really a conscience or is it just another set of external rules?

This is not to say that you force your beliefs on others but you try to live them, sometimes successfully, sometimes not.

Forcing yourself on others is not Christianity, following Jesus in what He taught, lived and died for is, at least trying to follow Him, remember He gave us the invitation to, "Come follow Me".

You also wrote, " As some of us used to be taught, if Jesus is not Lord of all, he is not Lord at all.", well it is one or the other.

Jesus was either telling the Truth or He was lying.

Jesus did not teach tolerance, He taught Love which happens to mean He taught us about God, Who is a Being of Pure Love.

Some of the putrid garbage being spewed out in God's Name has absolutely nothing at all to do with what Jesus taught, and what He lived and died for and WHY He chose to become a human being in the first place.

God is a searcher of hearts and minds not of religious affiliations or lack thereof and also it is important what you do and why you do it and what you know.

Take care, be ready, see you and the rest of humanity in the Kingdom.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Islamic Shari'ah laws would be classified as the Dark Age "visions" of a bunch of "Sun poisoned" males from various sides of the sand dunes.

The flaws and "laws" of Islam:

Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven,warmongering, hallucinating Arab who also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

This agenda continues as shown by the assassination of Bhutto, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”.

And who funds these acts of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

Didn't Dr Williams become a member of the highest of the three orders of the Gorsedd of Bards? a 1,300-strong circle of Wales' key cultural contributors - in a ceremony at the National Eisteddfod celebration of Welsh culture.

I do not know if this is a Druid group...the headress,certainly was...and it seems that the ritual itself was full of Paganism. Though they said the language (welch) was hymns and prayers to the Christian god.

It seems that Dr. Williamson is a dareing person and not afraid to experience much.

We are a secular country with secular laws...I am sure no law would be above what we were founded on.

terra

I was very glad to see Dr. Wright's response. As an Episcopalian, it has always frustrated me that our church is so often "bumper-stickered" by sometimes well-meaning but often sensationalist media. From sexuality to social justice, we have generally approached disagreements with painfully honest openness and an intellectual rigor rarely found in more dogmatic faith traditions. We admit we don't have perfect answers - rather we allow the church as a whole to "muddle through" the issues in such a way as to allow for multiple points of view and for community discernment. This is not new in the Christian faith - an example being the writers of the four Gospels who often had different opinions between themselves as well as with the earlier epistles. We try to focus on the unifying core of the faith ( in my mind the two great commandments regarding love) and so gain perspective on the issues. We certainly don't always succeed, but at least we try to face our disagreements rather than wish them out of existence. The Archbishop of Canterbury is a wise, loving and faithful person. While some of us have trouble with some of his decisions, they are always carefully considered. I only wish that other religious and political leaders worked as hard to solve problems as thoughtfully and prayerfully as he does.

I was very glad to see Dr. Wright's response. As an Episcopalian, it has always frustrated me that our church is so often "bumper-stickered" by sometimes well-meaning but often sensationalist media. From sexuality to social justice, we have generally approached disagreements with painfully honest openness and an intellectual rigor rarely found in more dogmatic faith traditions. We admit we don't have perfect answers - rather we allow the church as a whole to "muddle through" the issues in such a way as to allow for multiple points of view and for community discernment. This is not new in the Christian faith - an example being the writers of the four Gospels who often had different opinions between themselves as well as with the earlier epistles. We try to focus on the unifying core of the faith ( in my mind the two great commandments regarding love) and so gain perspective on the issues. We certainly don't always succeed, but at least we try to face our disagreements rather than wish them out of existence. The Archbishop of Canterbury is a wise, loving and faithful person. While some of us have trouble with some of his decisions, they are always carefully considered. I only wish that other religious and political leaders worked as hard to solve problems as thoughtfully and prayerfully as he does.

I was very glad to see Dr. Wright's response. As an Episcopalian, it has always frustrated me that our church is so often "bumper-stickered" by sometimes well-meaning but often sensationalist media. From sexuality to social justice, we have generally approached disagreements with painfully honest openness and an intellectual rigor rarely found in more dogmatic faith traditions. We admit we don't have perfect answers - rather we allow the church as a whole to "muddle through" the issues in such a way as to allow for multiple points of view and for community discernment. This is not new in the Christian faith - an example being the writers of the four Gospels who often had different opinions between themselves as well as with the earlier epistles. We try to focus on the unifying core of the faith ( in my mind the two great commandments regarding love) and so gain perspective on the issues. We certainly don't always succeed, but at least we try to face our disagreements rather than wish them out of existence. The Archbishop of Canterbury is a wise, loving and faithful person. While some of us have trouble with some of his decisions, they are always carefully considered. I only wish that other religious and political leaders worked as hard to solve problems as thoughtfully and prayerfully as he does.

hi moin ansari-

thanks for sharing the crapola they are filling your mind with at the local mosque.

please post more. it is so entertaining to hear from you.

Rowan is right. The press may have defined "shariah" as a "neanderthal law practiced by cave men who want to shut down technology and keep women boxed up in clothes."

Muslims can take many quotes from the Talmudic laws, from the Torah, from the New testament and make a simlar or worse case. We have posted this on our website http://www.rupeenews.com.

By discussion Numbers, Deutronomy, Acts and many other parts of the Bible and Torah we wanted to convey the point that any scripture can be misquoted to demonize. Our purpose was not to denigrate any religion.

Rowan is right, simple aspects of Shariah law can help decide cases of divorce, halal food, kosher acceptability, and other educaitonal issues

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
God Bless you!

Rowan is right. The press may have defined "shariah" as a "neanderthal law practiced by cave men who want to shut down technology and keep women boxed up in clothes."

Muslims can take many quotes from the Talmudic laws, from the Torah, from the New testament and make a simlar or worse case. We have posted this on our website http://www.rupeenews.com.

By discussion Numbers, Deutronomy, Acts and many other parts of the Bible and Torah we wanted to convey the point that any scripture can be misquoted to demonize. Our purpose was not to denigrate any religion.

Rowan is right, simple aspects of Shariah law can help decide cases of divorce, halal food, kosher acceptability, and other educaitonal issues

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
God Bless you!

Rowan is right. The press may have defined "shariah" as a "neanderthal law practiced by cave men who want to shut down technology and keep women boxed up in clothes."

Muslims can take many quotes from the Talmudic laws, from the Torah, from the New testament and make a simlar or worse case. We have posted this on our website http://www.rupeenews.com.

By discussion Numbers, Deutronomy, Acts and many other parts of the Bible and Torah we wanted to convey the point that any scripture can be misquoted to demonize. Our purpose was not to denigrate any religion.

Rowan is right, simple aspects of Shariah law can help decide cases of divorce, halal food, kosher acceptability, and other educaitonal issues

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!

The nuanced proposal is not what has been bandied about in the press, but it still doesn't scale: what do we do with 50 religious laws?. And it still doesn't make sense: if we don't accomodate 50, which of course we cannot, but we still give a particular religious law status, then how is that not giving specific religious belief preference under the law?

Why it is that we have forgotten the last bloodfest in the name of religion, I could not say. The nations of Europe came to their senses when they realized the blood was shed when nation gave official status to particular religion; take that away, and the bloodletting goes way, way down. And it did. Why we have forgotten that is a mystery. Perhaps it will be a bloody mystery.

This article is all a series of platitudes that glosses over the wider point. I read Williams' point: he thinks that Sharia law should be accomodated within the legal system, and that Muslims in Britain should be subject, at least in some instances, to a different set of laws. It completely contradicts the principle on which all law is based: one law for everyone, with no one above or below it.

For the Love of GOD, Tom Wright--

Quit pushing lukewarm pablum here and let Rowan Williams speak for himself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4Wm_hSpCVI

And perhaps you would like to hear what Muslims in Britain are saying about "secularism- a western point of view" (a screed against separation of church and state):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLHdmaAoHjI

CHECK OUT:

Secularism is "sheer absurdity" 4:37

What is the enemy of the Muslim world? It not necessarily the person with white skin.. the enemy are people who are driven by this idea (secularism) 5:05

Bishop:!!!

While your gang contemplate 'officially' recognizing Islam in the law shouldn't you add all faiths at the same time? How about Devil worshipers?

Oops! http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul exposes your already 'official' religion as just that, Devil worshiping.

I wonder if any MP will have the courage to mention that during debate. Devil will surely not take such publicity lightly. Here in the colonies any such public notice that all faith is in Devil is met with an immediate condemnation to hell by Lucifer's ministers. Probably the ultimate case of, "damned if you do and damned if you don't."

Is there as much money in representing Lucifer Islam style as there is in Christian mode? Only the Ayatollah can say for sure but only after he consults with the Archbishop of Canterbury?

Silly me, I thought the Queen was head of the English church. We got a few 'queens' with ministries here and even our national church had one until somebody tattled. I don't suppose you folks call them queens out of respect.

Sorry, but this is nothing but relatavist PC claptrap. There should NEVER be a space in the law for imposing a particular religion's dictats. Having said that, there should always be as much space in the law as possible for individuals to solve problems and address conflicts on their own terms.

This means that imposing a specific legal regime on people because they are Muslims -- even self-identified Muslims -- is abhorent to the very concept of liberal democracy. However, there is nothing wrong with allowing competent adults to apply Islamic principles to reach mutually acceptable solutions to their problems. It's fine in principle, for example, if two people wish to enter into a pre-marital agreement that settles such things as property distribution in case of divorce. But that is a very different proposition from having the state apply Islamic family law to a divorcing couple because they are Muslim.

What rubbish. Just what we need - an apologia for bad ideas and bad policy.

Fantastic essay! Well balanced, and lacking that nasty reactionary tone that pollutes the writings of so many journalists.

Thanks, Dr. Wright,
Craig