It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Tennessee Mom Throws A Fit When Her Daughter Learns About Islam In School

page: 26
50
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 08:13 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

and yet, can you deny that there are christian sects that do put as much weight on the old testament as they do the new? which, I believe is the point that is being made by others.
belief of something above us is important to many people, and yet the scriptures that we are told to follow are from another time, another place, another culture that is really kind of foreign to us. we can now cook pork much more safely than they could 2 or 3 more thousand years ago, and we really do like our easter hams, so we naturally come up with reasons why that part just doesn't pertain to our modern day world. women can safely walk down the street, there isn't hordes of men raping and pillaging on a daily basis, so well, we don't see a need to hide our femininity. we life in a kinder world, with far less danger, so we treat our children more kindly and don't drag them to the gates of the city to be stoned! we pick and chose among those outdated texts just what seems to be relevant and seems to be barbaric and cruel, and we follow that which we deem as being just.
and yet, there are christian sects that still claim that the old laws should be followed to a t or damnation will follow.

human nature basically is the same throughout humanity. it would surprise me quite a bit if the second and third generations of muslims that live in the western world aren't doing basically the same thing.




posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 08:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Of course.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 08:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Please don't.

This thread is in desperate need of your specific knowledge.

Heh heh, sorry.
I've still been skimming the thread. It seems to be clear as day that the school isn't forcing Islam onto anyone, but that doesn't seem to matter to some people.

Then again, during my senior year in high school, students were allowed a religious exemption from assignments about "The Iliad" and other works about the Greco-Roman pantheons. And that was in my AP English class lol. And I don't remember them ever teaching anything about other religions throughout the rest of grade school either. In fact, some of my middle school & high school friends thought that Islam was simply another denomination of Christianity. As in, "Muslim? Oh, like a Mormon?". All of this was obviously before 9/11.

Either way, I know just how seriously some people take that stuff out here. It's usually only 1or 2 people who go as far as the mother in the OP, but it still happens from time to time.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 08:32 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

Of course I don't deny that.

But we live in a world where very few actually are what they claim to be.Enlightened Servant earlier made mention that Muslims believe the Bible has been corrupted; in some sense, I agree. Perhaps we should stop calling people Christians and refer to them as "people who call themselves Christian, and believe in the following list of 45,764 verses: verse 1:...."

Or we could just accept the fact that labels and symbols have no meaning in themselves. It would mean a lot less writing...

The last couple of posts have been to point out inconsistencies between popular belief and what was written in the Bible. If someone wishes to call themselves Christian and ignore some of the tenets of actual defined Christianity, that is their right and their prerogative. That does not change the definition, however.

I am no scholar on Islam, but I would not be surprised if the same phenomenon were not the cause behind the Islamophobia (correct term; there is an actual fear of the religion among many in the US) presently existing. If I am correct, the proper way to combat that fear is to understand the differences between those who practice the various sects.

Or we could keep trying to simplify and broadly generalize, ignoring individual beliefs in favor of hyped up ignorant statements. That'll work... just look how far we've come using it! Please, carry on.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 08:51 AM
link   
500 plus responses, and not a single person will lift a finger to change any of whats happening.

Sorry folks, I got give HRC response to this one..........




posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: flatbush71

just what would you like for us to do???

common sense says to just settle down and wait to see just what the facts are and how the legal system acts before any action is taken.



edit on 11-10-2016 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck



The last couple of posts have been to point out inconsistencies between popular belief and what was written in the Bible. If someone wishes to call themselves Christian and ignore some of the tenets of actual defined Christianity, that is their right and their prerogative. That does not change the definition, however.

I am no scholar on Islam, but I would not be surprised if the same phenomenon were not the cause behind the Islamophobia (correct term; there is an actual fear of the religion among many in the US) presently existing. If I am correct, the proper way to combat that fear is to understand the differences between those who practice the various sects.

You're completely right about this. There are many different interpretations of Islam, with most picking and choosing what they want to believe to some extent. For example, in theory, all Muslims should follow the entire Qur'an. But in practice, many entire denominations minimize the Qur'an and focus on specific Sunnah and/or Hadith. And many Salafis (particularly Wahhabis) even consider the Qur'an incomplete and use their own additional works to define what Islam "really is" (though to admit that out loud is basically blasphemy, so they spin it by saying "there are lost verses that confirm our stuff" and "the people we're quoting were among those who there each time the Prophet Muhammad received a new Qur'anic verse, so they're credible).

And even the Muslims who want to follow the Qur'an directly will have a hard time doing it. It's hard for me to explain this accurately, but I'll try with this set of convoluted points
:

1. The Qur'an is written in a complex and highly detailed form of ancient/original Arabic. It's like writing the concept of "two" by writing "Numeral +2.00".

2. The different dialects of modern Arabic are like shorthand versions of Quranic Arabic, with new words and meanings included over the last 1400 years. So it's like writing the concept of "two" as "2", or "II" if they had extensive contact with Latin cultures.

Technically, the examples in #1 & #2 are saying the same things: "two". But if a regional dialect doesn't have or use the word "Numeral" and you don't use symbols like the plus sign or the period, it would be confusing. As in, does it mean "two, to, or too"? (Just think of trying to translate Shakespearean English into shorthand, modern English.)

3. Because of these differences, even native Arabic speakers have to learn Quranic Arabic before learning to read the Qur'an. But who would they learn it from? That's where many of the issues come in.

4. Each denomination and "school of thought" typically has its own schools and lessons on how to interpret/understand each word in the Qur'an. The differences may be slight at first, but the accumulation of these differences can change the meanings of entire passages and Surahs. (An individual can also just learn each word and phrase on their own, but other Muslims may not accept this.)

Just think about the English word "fight". Does the phrase "You must fight" mean "you must wage war" or "you must oppose"? And was the word "you" in that phrase singular or plural, feminine or masculine? Depending on your cultural and personal beliefs, "You must fight" can mean "Your men must wage war" or "You as an individual must speak up against what you disbelieve in". And the "must" implies that is mandatory. So what happens to those who disobey your interpretation of that phrase, since it seems mandatory?

5. Because of these kinds of differences, each denomination and "school of thought" can have vastly different interpretations of the same Qur'anic verses (or very similar interpretations. it's weird). The more credible schools will teach a variety of interpretations and dialects for each word, but others will also warn that no one but those who know every possible interpretation that they accept should have a say in Islamic rules or leadership. For example, clearly the groups like Salafis and Shiites have reached vastly different conclusions on different passages.

6. These different interpretations can be small or vast. This is why even 2 Sunni sects may pray slightly differently, prohibit different things, etc. Yet a Sunni sect and a Shiite sect may agree on those same things. And each denomination or school of thought will also conveniently interpret Quranic passages in ways that confirm the non-Qur'an teachings that they follow. For example, gender segregation, circumcision, the Dajjal/Antichrist, and stoning to death for crimes are not mentioned in the Qur'an. But some of its passages are interpreted differently by specific sects in order to justify Hadith or Sunnah that promote them.

This is also why it's important for people to mention the Qur'an translation they're using when referencing the Qur'an. Because many of those same sects have their own "translations" of the Qur'an, which can differ greatly. As a rule, anything in parenthesis in a Qur'an translation is added by the editor for "clarification". But not all translations have "clarifications" at the same places, and some (like the Sahih International translation) may add things without putting them in parenthesis. So the only way to know for sure is to look at multiple translations and/or look up the exact words in Qur'anic Arabic for yourself (though many people will simply look for an explanation from a scholar they accept/acknowledge).

It actually gets even deeper than this, but I think this gets the point across. And this is just from the scholarly/religious leadership side. Most normal Muslims don't go into this much detail and don't argue over the semantics like the leaders do. Many typically start with their local interpretation of Islam (while ignoring the stuff they don't accept), and then start learning more over time (including switching denominations or sects, becoming non-practicing or rejecting it altogether).



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

I let people call themselves whatever they want. When it comes to religion and its ability to be open to tons of interpretations, if you say you believe in God, Allah, Jehova, whatever then I'll let you call yourself that religion. Who are YOU to say they are worshiping it wrong? It's not like you know any better.

This is why anyone who tells me that Muslims HAVE to worship their religion a certain way and that moderates aren't Muslims and all that other tripe, it is a bunch of stinking bs. They have no right to say who is and isn't Muslim. Especially since they aren't even Muslim.

I certainly disagree with all religions, but I won't stand in your way to self-delude yourself with them.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t



I certainly disagree with all religions, but I won't stand in your way to self-delude yourself with them.



LOL, I actually understand where you're coming from. My basic view on beliefs and ideologies is "live and let live". As long as people do no harm to others, I don't care if they worship their ancestors, a tree, a statue or carving, a pear shaped cloud, a mountain sized frog demon, or nothing at all.

edit on 11-10-2016 by enlightenedservant because: typos everywhere. i blame trump



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Yeah. It's a simple philosophy. Why it's so hard for people in this country to follow is beyond me.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 10:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: dawnstar
Why dig when it is much easier to baselessly assume and present that as factual? Critical thought takes effort. People on ATS aren't looking to expend effort.


Grab a mirror...

You start out by stating that the Marine was a bigot and the class 100% benign as fact and then tell me I have to wait for the court case to run its course before I can have anything to say about it. You also claim to know what I'm actually saying rather than think about what I've said.

I'll probably get to have my last post at ATS deleted, because this one was it.

You can read minds and predict the future. I can see why you had a problem with the Old Testament.

You've convinced me ATS no longer holds anything for me.

Live Long & Prosper Captain.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 10:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Yeah. It's a simple philosophy. Why it's so hard for people in this country to follow is beyond me.

You mean "on this planet" instead of "in this country" right? Because there are people like that everywhere, unfortunately.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

True. True... It's rather ridiculous how personal people take someone not believing the same things they do.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: CornShucker

Sounds great. So I don't have to talk to you anymore? Awesome.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant


So the only way to know for sure is to look at multiple translations and/or look up the exact words in Qur'anic Arabic for yourself

That is precisely what I do with the Bible. The original scrolls are written in ancient Hebrew (Old Testament) or ancient Greek (New Testament). That was then translated to more modern versions throughout early Christianity, and finally into Old English in the King James Version.

I use Strong's Exhaustive Concordance which gives the original Hebrew/Greek word, its meaning(s) in context, its roots, and provides references to where the same word has been interpreted the same way or into other words. Through study of each word and the context it is being used in, I am able to better understand what (I think and hope) is the original intent of the authors.

Example: "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" has been interpreted as "Kill all witches." But when I studied the verse, it came out something more akin to "Do not help a spiritualist to prosper"... in modern slang, "Don't subscribe to the Psychic Hotline." Quite a different interpretation, and a reasonable one at that.

There are many more examples... far too many to list here.

The thing is that most people can't (or won't) take the time to do what I do. Any time one allows another to decide their interpretation, it increases the likelihood of being told wrong. That statement is not a function of which religion one subscribes to (it actually applies even to older writings like Shakespeare).

TheRedneck

P.S: Thanks for the additional information in that post.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I just find it a tad disingenuous of you to tell someone else what their own beliefs are, which is exactly what you did to me in that first post. If I had time, I could show you where the Old Testament, according to the teachings of Jesus, is not an absolute mandate for those who follow Him.

It would be like me trying to tell enlightenedservant about his sect of Islam. Completely disingenuous, because I know precious little about the religion, not to even mention about his particular interpretation.

But to be honest, I don't have time to get into that detail with you, especially when I feel sure you would ignore whatever I spent time writing.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 11:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I just find it a tad disingenuous of you to tell someone else what their own beliefs are, which is exactly what you did to me in that first post. If I had time, I could show you where the Old Testament, according to the teachings of Jesus, is not an absolute mandate for those who follow Him.

No I didn't. I told you what I was raised to believe as a Catholic because YOU told me that the OT was no longer used. In fact, the whole reason I did that was because YOU were telling me how Christians were supposed to worship their religion.

Talk about being disingenuous... You just straight up ignored your contribution to that conversation.
edit on 11-10-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Actually, I said its use was historical, not nonexistant. I was also speaking from my own religious background to show that not everyone agreed with your personal interpretation. I have no problem with you speaking from yours, but your response was worded in such a way as to appear to me that you wanted to argue over my belief.

I have made similar statements to others, like enlightened servant. He seems to get that a religious statement of faith is inherently a statement of individual faith, since we do not live in a theocracy.

That's fine if you want to consider my statements blanket, although you never did tell me what I wanted for dinner last night. I had to figure it out all by myself. Sure would have been easier if you had just told me what I was thinking.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Whatever you want to call it. I've seen Christians use it historically and spiritually. To say it isn't used that way is telling others how to worship their religion. It's funny how you are trying to weasel out of admitting that you did that with me right after accusing me of doing the same. There's a reason I was short with you in that response. Looks like I made the right call on that one since you can't admit your own faults.

PS: Plus my whole POINT has been that because Christians worship their religion different from person to person then Muslims can do the same. If Christians can ignore parts of their holy works, then so can Muslims. So you arguing with me makes no sense anyways; we likely agree with each other.
edit on 11-10-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

We absolutely do agree that Muslims are free to worship any way they choose. Everyone is free to do so.

Even you.

TheRedneck



new topics

top topics



 
50
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join