Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 5 Votes - 4.2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-07-2012, 12:45 PM (This post was last modified: 16-07-2012 11:24 AM by SlipStitch.)
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
Wait a minute here! You mean to tell me nobody wanted to talk about PORK?! I sure do! I mean, maybe I missed it in all that, 'cause that was a lot to read, but... seriously, nobody?

I get that your god says that pork, shellfish, etc are "unclean". I can even get why that would have been said back when your holy book was written because they didn't have the kinds of sanitation methods that we have in our current, more advanced society. But I still can't help but shake my head at this, regardless.

If your god hated these things so much as it seems he does, why would he have created them in the first place? What is the logic behind putting something that tastes good in front of people who would then want to consume it and tell them they're forbidden from doing so? That seems overly cruel of this god, in my opinion. I know the Christian god used to have the same rules and that Jewish folks still follow those old rules in much the same way as Muslims do now, but it still baffles me that these things are still practiced.

At a former job of mine, there were several Muslim girls who also worked there. Sometimes, they would provide free meals to us in the form of Subway sandwiches. Though I don't agree with what he did, one of the employees said to a Muslim girl who picked up a sandwich, "That one is ham!" The girl then practically THREW the sandwich as if it had turned into a poisonous snake right in her hands, and screamed loudly. Someone assured her that it was not ham and was, in fact, roast beef. But the reaction gave me pause. She was so afraid of having even touched pork that she flew into a panic. How terrible living a life like that must be...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes SlipStitch's post
15-07-2012, 12:53 PM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(15-07-2012 12:45 PM)SlipStitch Wrote:  Wait a minute here! You mean to tell me nobody wanted to talk about PORK?! I sure do! I mean, maybe I missed it in all that, 'cause that was a lot to read, but... seriously, nobody?

I get that your god says that pork, shellfish, etc are "unclean". I can even get why that would have been said back when your holy book was written because they didn't have the kinds of sanitation methods that we have in our current, more advanced society. But I still can't help but shake my head at this, regardless.

If your god hated these things so much as it seems he does, why would he have created them in the first place? What is the logic behind putting something that tastes good in front of people who would then want to consume it and tell them they're forbidden from doing so? That seems overly cruel of this god, in my opinion. I know the Christian god used to have the same rules and that Jewish folks still follow those old rules in much the same way as Muslims do now, but it still baffles me that these things are still practiced.

At a former job of mine, there were several Muslim girls who also worked there. Sometimes, they would provide free meals to us in the form of Subway sandwiches. Though I don't agree with what he did, one of the employees said to a Muslim girl who picked up a sandwich, "That one is ham!" The girl then practically THREW the sandwich as if it had turned into a poisonous snake right in her hands, and screamed loudly. Someone assured her that it was not ham and was, in fact, roast beef. But the reaction gave me pause. She was so afraid of having even touched pork that she flew into a panic. How terribly living a life like that must be...
That people adhere to the dietary laws in the Bible just makes me weep. I worked with a fellow who, though raised Reform, decided to go Conservative and keep Kosher. I just shook my head and wondered why someone would want to make his (and his family's) life harder. And do it for no rational reason.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2012, 07:50 AM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
Hi Mullah,
(25-04-2012 10:15 AM)Internet Mullah Wrote:  That being said, I do believe that Islam is a religion of peace even though it includes laws to punish and/or execute criminals. One of the reason is because Islam prohibits the killing of any innocent person, Muslim or non-Muslim. According to the Quran, killing an innocent person is like killing the entire community of human beings. According to the Quran, "He who kills a person without (the latter) having killed another person, it is as if he has killed all of humanity, and he who makes one person survive, it is as if he has caused all humanity to survive" (Qur’an 5:32). Where someone deliberately kills another, Islamic law imposes capital punishment as a deterrent.

The only problem is that, as in any religion, there are Muslims who use violence to achieve certain social and/or political objectives. However, in my experience, the vast majority of Muslims do not advocate violence, but wish to live peacefully with everyone else. I think it is unfair to label all Muslims as violent or as aggressive because of the actions of a few extremists. There are also violent or fanatical groups among Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Hindus, and Buddhists, for example, and that the majority in those groups should not be blamed for the actions of the minority. In my view, the same should apply to Muslims.
"He who kills a person without (the latter) having killed another
person, it is as if he has killed all of humanity, and he who makes one
person survive, it is as if he has caused all humanity to survive"
(Qur’an 5:32).

Specifically this, and your wider statement above. Ive read the thread up till now and I dont wanna jump on the your an evil muslim bandwagon, but it seems to me this contradicts what you said about adultery earlier. In that adultery is a sin that damages society and that the law prescribes the death penalty for the good of all.

Is it then your view that vaginal penetration in an unlawful fashion is murder, thats retorical Im sure its it not your view. But, if Qur'an 5:32 has validiity then the death sentence for a mortal crime is the same as the the total genocide of the species.

This seems to be absolutly blatant - your not happy about, but I read that you condone or at least accept the death sentence for adultery. Seems like that directly contradicts, well it doesnt contradict, maybe adultery is a sin hienous enough to kill all of humanity over.

Cant believe, you havent thought of this idependently, care to compare and contrast or explain the death penalty for adultery or apostacy it light of the spirit of 5:32.

Are those who sentence people to death for non mortal crimes guilty metaphorically of genocide, if they are does this open them to the death sentence for "like" killing all of humanity.

I'm being a little flippant, Ive not slept in 48 hours so I hope you'll look past that and deal with the spirit of the above.

Also, just because it pisses me off when people use this kind of argumentation:

Not addressed to mullah, just an aside.

Imagine theres a picture below to double click on, it has a white guy wearing a white pride T-shirt therefore if your white your a rascist. Please leave that shit at the door. mmmk thx.

Legal Disclaimer: I am right, I reserve the right to be wrong without notice, opinions may change, your statutory rights are not affected, opinions expressed are not my own and are an approximation for the sake of communication.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2012, 07:59 AM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
Muslims assert that Allah is a later evolution, and indeed the same divine being, (in pre Islamic times), as Yahweh, the god of the other guys, (the Patriarchs, Prophets, and Apostles...the Jewish people, and the Christians). Thus the ONLY issue is the obvious one of continuity. If Allah really IS Yahweh, then "he" is just, if not more ridiculous, than the Yahweh god, (the "God of the Armies", better known to Christians as the "Lord of Hosts"). Even some Christians attempt to say Islam is one of the three "Abrahamics". Historically, this is false.

Yahweh is easily refuted, historically. So the question is, "is Allah, (Ilah) a DIFFERENT deity, or a continuity?". While the claim in Islam is that the deity IS a continuity, in fact it isn't. Allah, upon historical examination, proves to be a pre-Islamic deity. The continuity claim is essential if the claim to a "continuous flow" of revelation is to remain intact. Allah, historically, has been proven to be a PRE-ISLAMIC moon-god. In fact Mecca was originally built as a shrine to the moon-god. The religious claims are shredded by the archaeology, just as happens with the Yahweh claims. Allah, just as Yahweh, had a wife. He was married to the sun goddess, and the stars were the daughters. Just as Yahweh, Allah was not the only god in the house. The popularity of the moon god, began to wane, as astronomers began to predict the moon's cycle, so Arabs began to say that the moon-god was the greatest of the gods, just as Yahweh came to be seen as the one god, when in fact he was one of many. Besides the moon-god, they also worshiped 359 other known gods at the Kabah in Mecca.

The temple of the moon god remained active as a worship site well into the Christian era, and the moon god was worshiped in both North Arabia, and South Arabia in Muhammad's day, and was still the dominant cult. The name of the moon god was "Sin", but it's title was al-ilah, which meant "the deity", (emphasis on "the"), ie meaning this deity was the chief among the gods. The god Il, or "Ilah", was a PHASE of the moon god. Allah was a popular name. Muhammad's father and uncle had "Allah", as part of their names. Allah is NEVER defined in the Qur'an. Why ? Because Muhammad was raised in the cult of the moon-god, and he assumed that everyone already knew who he was. Muhammad just went the extra step, (as the later Jews did), and said he was one of many, then was first of many, then the only.

The claim that Allah IS Yahweh is nonsense. Islam is a moon-god cult, AND even if Allah were Yahweh, since Yahweh is nonsense, so is Allah.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZY2eeozdo8

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
16-07-2012, 08:27 AM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(16-07-2012 07:50 AM)Humakt Wrote:  Hi Mullah,
(25-04-2012 10:15 AM)Internet Mullah Wrote:  That being said, I do believe that Islam is a religion of peace even though it includes laws to punish and/or execute criminals. One of the reason is because Islam prohibits the killing of any innocent person, Muslim or non-Muslim. According to the Quran, killing an innocent person is like killing the entire community of human beings. According to the Quran, "He who kills a person without (the latter) having killed another person, it is as if he has killed all of humanity, and he who makes one person survive, it is as if he has caused all humanity to survive" (Qur’an 5:32). Where someone deliberately kills another, Islamic law imposes capital punishment as a deterrent.

The only problem is that, as in any religion, there are Muslims who use violence to achieve certain social and/or political objectives. However, in my experience, the vast majority of Muslims do not advocate violence, but wish to live peacefully with everyone else. I think it is unfair to label all Muslims as violent or as aggressive because of the actions of a few extremists. There are also violent or fanatical groups among Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Hindus, and Buddhists, for example, and that the majority in those groups should not be blamed for the actions of the minority. In my view, the same should apply to Muslims.
Belief in the death penalty for adultery leaves that person morally and ethically deficient. Everything else is just spin.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
16-07-2012, 08:36 AM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(16-07-2012 08:27 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-07-2012 07:50 AM)Humakt Wrote:  Hi Mullah,
Belief in the death penalty for adultery leaves that person morally and ethically deficient. Everything else is just spin.
But belief in the death penalty for other stuff, is hunky dunky?

Legal Disclaimer: I am right, I reserve the right to be wrong without notice, opinions may change, your statutory rights are not affected, opinions expressed are not my own and are an approximation for the sake of communication.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2012, 08:37 AM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(16-07-2012 08:36 AM)Humakt Wrote:  
(16-07-2012 08:27 AM)Chas Wrote:  Belief in the death penalty for adultery leaves that person morally and ethically deficient. Everything else is just spin.
But belief in the death penalty for other stuff, is hunky dunky?
Yeah, and the chopping off of hands and feet, too. Weeping


Look, I'm terse, OK?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
16-07-2012, 08:40 AM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(16-07-2012 08:37 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-07-2012 08:36 AM)Humakt Wrote:  But belief in the death penalty for other stuff, is hunky dunky?
Yeah, and the chopping off of hands and feet, too. Weeping


Look, I'm terse, OK?
Terse, fine I can handle terse.

But are you saying the death penalty is ok as well as retributive mutilation is also. But if it used for adultery its wrong.

Or you sayin the death penalty is always wrong?

Legal Disclaimer: I am right, I reserve the right to be wrong without notice, opinions may change, your statutory rights are not affected, opinions expressed are not my own and are an approximation for the sake of communication.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2012, 08:48 AM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(16-07-2012 08:40 AM)Humakt Wrote:  
(16-07-2012 08:37 AM)Chas Wrote:  Yeah, and the chopping off of hands and feet, too. Weeping


Look, I'm terse, OK?
Terse, fine I can handle terse.

But are you saying the death penalty is ok as well as retributive mutilation is also. But if it used for adultery its wrong.

Or you sayin the death penalty is always wrong?
D. None of the above.

I think that the morality and ethics and laws promulgated by the Bible and Koran are inconsistent and often abominable. Sharia law is disgusting. I don't believe in mutilation or death as useful or humane. However, I am not dead-set against the death penalty. I think there are some exceptional cases where it is justifiable, i.e. for truly heinous crimes where the weight of evidence is incontrovertible.

Note: Weeping was indicating over-wrought irony. Mods, where is that irony font or smiley?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2012, 11:01 AM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(16-07-2012 08:48 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-07-2012 08:40 AM)Humakt Wrote:  Terse, fine I can handle terse.

But are you saying the death penalty is ok as well as retributive mutilation is also. But if it used for adultery its wrong.

Or you sayin the death penalty is always wrong?
D. None of the above.

I think that the morality and ethics and laws promulgated by the Bible and Koran are inconsistent and often abominable. Sharia law is disgusting. I don't believe in mutilation or death as useful or humane. However, I am not dead-set against the death penalty. I think there are some exceptional cases where it is justifiable, i.e. for truly heinous crimes where the weight of evidence is incontrovertible.

Note: Weeping was indicating over-wrought irony. Mods, where is that irony font or smiley?
OK, still some what contradictory, your dead set against, but feel it can justified. Think its inhumane, but happy to practice it. Believe in incontrovertible evidence.

To me it seems the morality, ethics and laws you advocade are inconsistent, abominable and frankly disgistusting and based in you blind faith in absolute proof.

In short I see no objective difference between what you decry and denounce and what you advocate, except in a matter of degree. If anything, at least the religious can justify there view in light of a higher power thus washing there hands misguidedly or otherwise morally speaking, where as you admit that such behaviour is inhumane, but nonetheless would feel justified in being the monster if you believed and you dont have the luxury of passing on the moral buck.

Weeping not irony, more weeping for humanity.

PS Its not just you, Ive had a pretty depessing few days, but what is point in all this talk about the march of rationality and how religion is wrong and secularism is the new golden dawn if nothing changes except the buzz words we use to justify the horrors we perpetrate.
Well that was a downer, Im gonna go shoot some orcs and loot there corpses.

Legal Disclaimer: I am right, I reserve the right to be wrong without notice, opinions may change, your statutory rights are not affected, opinions expressed are not my own and are an approximation for the sake of communication.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: