Sharia Law, What If ...

reply to post by Someone336


I don't have a problem with it either .

But the key word here is "few",

reply to post by buddhasystem


I must be dense, it didn't get that from his post.

Originally posted by ThaLoccster
Doesn't the bible regularly talk about killing in the name of god?

Doesn't some jewist text say its ok to sleep with a gentiles child as long as she is atleast 2 years old?

Yes, thats why I included the phrase 'abrahamic mythologies'.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Rarely I encountered an OP as inane as one in this thread. The author is contemplating killing innocents. The "what if" is just a smokescreen for a violent fantasy.

You couldn't be more wrong about me.

But let's discuss how you time and time again seem to try and defend those that really are doing these things.

I believe that many people are slipping the "reading comprehension" thing right out the window and instead are going on emotion. Lets take the word "Islam" out to actually understand what the OP is saying.

He is saying, "what if" we actually do what some people believe (eye for an eye) instead of dimplomacy. What would happen then? If people would actually read the OP, they would clearly see that he is in no way advocating violence or following this. Just a hypothetical question, there is no mindset to this what so ever.

To answer the op, I personally believe that we should do so. If a certain people on this earth believed in an eye for an eye then it is my belief that we should give it to them. Maybe then they would choose to believe all the rest of the stuff that is in the Bible and Quran (you know, all that stuff about forgiveness and whatnot) and not the "I will smite thee Satan" crap.

Originally posted by Brother Stormhammer
reply to post by centurion1211

 

Separation of church and state: It's an integral part of American law, and a generally-accepted principle in most Western civilizations. Sharia law is the literal integration of church and state.

You my friend hit the nail on the head. However even in our western culture the separation of church is not as apparent as it should be.

reply to post by centurion1211


The U.S population is 53% female. It wouldn't happen here.

Sharia would be great here, no more female drivers! No more female workers! All those jobs would open up for the non-working males. No more unemployment. No more homosexuals to worry about offending. Quick deaths to anyone who breaks the law. Torture, amputations, beheadings on public display every Friday. It would be wonderful! Praise Allah and the great Prophet (pbuh)

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint

 

Even the man that I thought was so Americanized proved to be a monster, he bought a twenty year old American girl for 75,000 dollars, after his Americanized wife objected he threatened to send her, his wife, back, and they have been here thirty years,

Serious question. If this monster "bought" a girl for $75k, did anyone drop a tip to the police for slavery?

I could not strike at innocents. I fear, however, what has happened in Britain with entire areas being subjected to a law outside the country's home law.

reply to post by Mountainmeg

Serious question. If this monster "bought" a girl for $75k, did anyone drop a tip to the police for slavery?

Hard to believe isn't it?

A few years back this happened to a doctor who lived here with two wives, that went to court,

So I am wondering when this will be brought out into the open.

In a world of an eye for an eye the reductio ad absurdam to such a belief is that everybody ends up blind:
Given that mankind now have 27,000 fission fireball type nuke 'em devices in their enormous arsenals that is probably achievable:

Sharia says that the sexually 'adulterous' should be stoned to death.
As with the Old Testament in days of old, this usually means that the woman is stoned to death but the man walks free.

Also Sharia states that a woman's testimony is worth only half that of a man in a Sharia court of law. Therefore it needs two women making the same accusation against a single man to have him found guilty of whatsoever he is accused of by the women.
Mostly the women dare not make any such accusations of whatsoever ~ rape?

Another thing I don't like about Sharia is that any non Muslim who attempts to visit either Mecca or Medina can expect to be beheaded.
However, law abiding Muslims are free to come to the west and build their mosques:

Didn't Jesus say something about he who is without sin should cast the first stone in a case of a woman about to be stoned to death, reported somewhere in the Bible, to ancient memory.
Which would suggest that he would not be in favor of Sharia in that regard.

Originally posted by Epipactis
Another thing I don't like about Sharia is that any non Muslim who attempts to visit either Mecca or Medina can expect to be beheaded.

Well, I don't think they're cutting people's heads off just yet but its interesting to note that mecca has now employed 'kuffar fingerprinting technology' to ensure non-beleivers don't get in.

Any 'inferior kuffar' who does get in is regarded as a criminal, arrested and put in prison - like this chap:

Saudis Jail Christian for Entering Mecca

Saudi officials have arrested a man in Mecca for being a Christian, saying that the city, which Muslims consider to be holy, is off-limits to non-Muslims.

Nirosh Kamanda, a Sri Lankan Christian, was detained by the Saudi Expatriates Monitoring Committee last week after he started to sell goods outside Mecca's Great Mosque.

After running his fingerprints through a new security system, Saudi police discovered that he was a Christian who had arrived in the country six months earlier to take a job as a truck driver in the city of Dammam. Kamanda had subsequently left his place of work and moved to Mecca.

"The Grand Mosque and the holy city are forbidden to non-Muslims," Col. Suhail Matrafi, head of the department of Expatriates Affairs in Mecca, told the Saudi daily Arab News. "The new fingerprints system is very helpful and will help us a lot to discover the identity of a lot of criminals," he said.

Similar restrictions apply to the Saudi city of Medina. In a section entitled, "Traveler's Information," the Web site of the Saudi Embassy in Washington states that, "Mecca and Medina hold special religious significance and only persons of the Islamic faith are allowed entry."

Highway signs at the entrance to Mecca also direct non-Muslims away from the city's environs.

atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com...

reply to post by karl 12


Holy cow, how interesting, so much for common dialogue when one is considered a criminal when not Muslim.

And how many pilgrims go to Mecca every year?

the largest annual pilgrimage in the world?

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Rarely I encountered an OP as inane as one in this thread. The author is contemplating killing innocents. The "what if" is just a smokescreen for a violent fantasy.

You couldn't be more wrong about me.

But let's discuss how you time and time again seem to try and defend those that really are doing these things.

Sure, but first let's discuss why you resort to un-truths and demagoguery. I'm not a fan of Islam to begin with, and sure as hell I hate radicals and terrorists and what not. What you just said is untrue and it's sad that you stooped so low.

Your post does contain a hypothesized killing of innocent muslims to stem the rise of radical islam. Do you deny that?

Originally posted by Epipactis
Another thing I don't like about Sharia is that any non Muslim who attempts to visit either Mecca or Medina can expect to be beheaded.

I'm pretty sure that there are plenty of things about Sharia to not like!

But again, read the title of the thread: "what if". The speculation on the part of OP is that "what if" we (the westerners) may need to resort to brutal terror against muslims. So it's not as much about de-merits of Sharia as it is about a thinly veiled proposition by Centurion to do just that.