Here's what I don't understand.....

[rejoicing fan]

I have been told by more than one souce that it says in the Koran that all infidels should be killed. Is an infidel someone who doesn't recognize Allah as God and Muhommed as his prophet? If so is this where the justification of "jihad" lies?

How then is Islam a religion of peace if this killing of infidels is in their teaching? Or when they say religion of peace do they not mean one of religious tolerance? Then isn't Israel and the US for the most part countries of infidels-and this is why fundamentalists like Bin Laden are waging "jihad" against us?

Is this killing of infidels teaching in the Koran rejected, ignored, or accepted by non-fundamental muslims?

 

[U2Bama]

Some of the more extremist sects within Islam believe that the penalty for "apostacy," or, turning away from Islam to atheism or another religion, is death. Although this is referenced in the Qu'ran, it is not normally practiced except in nations which observe Shar'ia law, a set of extermely repressive laws that governments such as the enforce instead of civil law. Also, nations such as Sudan interpret the recognition of slavery in Shar'ia law as an endorsement of it, and therefore have slavery today. Keep in mind that slavery is also prevalent in the Bible, but in my research I have not found any Jewish or Christian governments that allow slavery today; for that matter, I cannot think of many Christian "governments" in existence today.

I am not familiar with any written or formal interpretation of Islam which states that all "infidels" (non-Muslims?) are to be killed; in fact, the Qu'ran preaches respect for Jews and Christians as "people of the book." It is true that Judaism, Christianity and Islam follow the same lineage of Abraham, and the Angel Gabriel who appeared to Mary is the same Gabriel whom Muslims believe appeared to Mohammed.

I have attended a service in a mosque and I must say that the people and the imam had the utmost respect for me and the group I was with, a religion class from the Methodist college I attended.

The Osama is invoking religious dogma in his campaign as a illegitimate excuse for his racist and seperatist dreams for the Arab lands and Central Asia, and when Muslims point this out, they are being sincere. Just as I today deplore the campaign which the European "Crusaders" advanced on them, so too is The Osama's "crusade" a bad campaign.

The fact of the matter is: theocracy is a BAD thing, regardless of the religion. No government should enforce any religion upon its people, and should definitely not enforce religious laws upon its people, regardless of whether or not 99.9% of its citizens follow that religion.

I am sorry if I have offended anyone with what I have said here.

~U2Alabama

 

[Patti Jones]

Originally posted by U2Bama:
Some of the more extremist sects within Islam believe that the penalty for "apostacy," or, turning away from Islam to atheism or another religion, is death. Although this is referenced in the Qu'ran, it is not normally practiced except in nations which observe Shar'ia law, a set of extermely repressive laws that governments such as the enforce instead of civil law. Also, nations such as Sudan interpret the recognition of slavery in Shar'ia law as an endorsement of it, and therefore have slavery today. Keep in mind that slavery is also prevalent in the Bible, but in my research I have not found any Jewish or Christian governments that allow slavery today; for that matter, I cannot think of many Christian "governments" in existence today.
~U2Alabama

Yes, but lets try to keep in mind that Islam is a religion a LOT newer than christianism, so they still have to modify some things (I truthly believe not many) to make them correlative to this times, and that 700 years ago there were a lot of christian gov that supported slavery. Catholisism has 2000 years, Islamism 1300, take your own conclusions.
I Agree with you in the whole rest of your post

Love and peace on earth!

------------------
Patti
-Pride Girl-

 

[U2Bama]

Well, Patti Jones, that gives no reason to excuse the existence of or the atrocities committed under the guise of Shar'ia law. Seperation of religion and state should be a universal concept.

By that reasoning, the U.S. government should have allowed David Koresh to create his own violent little government in Waco, Texas since they were a very "new" religion.

~U2Alabama

 

[Patti Jones]

Originally posted by U2Bama:
Well, Patti Jones, that gives no reason to excuse the existence of or the atrocities committed under the guise of Shar'ia law. Seperation of religion and state should be a universal concept.

By that reasoning, the U.S. government should have allowed David Koresh to create his own violent little government in Waco, Texas since they were a very "new" religion.

~U2Alabama

HEY! I didnt say they are OK..i say i agree in the whole of the post (or almost, i DONT think this is an Islamism trouble I think it is )...

What I meant to say is that It is undestandable (human history someone?) that a religion commit the same mistake that other that is older before...let me remind you that the catholic church murdered all the natives they found here based in that Mateo "True Treassure" thing...(in a polite way, but they did)

It does not give any excuse, i didnt mean to give any excuse...i just say...bah..i dont know why i keep this...BYE!

Love and Peace on earth!


------------------
Patti
-Pride Girl-

 

[U2Bama]

You say it is "understandable," but then you say it "doesn't give any excuse."

Never mind...

 

[Patti Jones]

Originally posted by U2Bama:
You say it is "understandable," but then you say it "doesn't give any excuse."

Never mind...

So...i shouldnt have used the word undestandable...i cant get the word i english sorry...i meant something like "it happens" is normal...i dont know, again...

Love and peace on earth!


------------------
Patti
-Pride Girl-