RE: Pat gets mad
August 11, 2011 at 5:23 pm
(This post was last modified: August 11, 2011 at 5:24 pm by fr0d0.)
I find your back peddling to be insincere and baseless in essence Rayaan.
You've mentioned the backup texts to the sword text many times now. YES WE KNOW you're citing mitigating circumstances for killing people, but killing people it still remains. You fail to see how this is uncivilized, and in alignment with OT Judaism, you're condoning killing as just. There's no getting away from that. You don't seem to be getting that point.
By 'siblings in Christ' I mean to say accepted variations in interpretation. The example you gave doesn't separate Christian and non Christian (as viewd by the mainstream Christian Church). There are many accepted denominations, and those considered outside the mainstream and therefore not Christian. My question to you then, was: do you regard those who interpret Islam as forceful, intolerant, strict as still Muslim or not?
I said: 'siblings in Christ' and not 'siblings of Christ'. That is totally nonsensical.
It remains a fact that Muslims push for Shariah law etc as a minority. Muslims in London have designated roads as under shariah law. Large UK cities are set to become Muslim majority very soon. The majority has the right to vote in the legal system of their choice. Currently Arabic is required on public signs, and preference is given in jobs to those fluent in it.
"The demand for the abolition of sharia courts in Britain, as elsewhere, is not an attack on people's right to religion; it is a defence of human rights, especially since the imposition of sharia courts is a demand of Islamism to restrict citizens' rights."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2010/jul/0...ous-courts
You've mentioned the backup texts to the sword text many times now. YES WE KNOW you're citing mitigating circumstances for killing people, but killing people it still remains. You fail to see how this is uncivilized, and in alignment with OT Judaism, you're condoning killing as just. There's no getting away from that. You don't seem to be getting that point.
By 'siblings in Christ' I mean to say accepted variations in interpretation. The example you gave doesn't separate Christian and non Christian (as viewd by the mainstream Christian Church). There are many accepted denominations, and those considered outside the mainstream and therefore not Christian. My question to you then, was: do you regard those who interpret Islam as forceful, intolerant, strict as still Muslim or not?
I said: 'siblings in Christ' and not 'siblings of Christ'. That is totally nonsensical.
It remains a fact that Muslims push for Shariah law etc as a minority. Muslims in London have designated roads as under shariah law. Large UK cities are set to become Muslim majority very soon. The majority has the right to vote in the legal system of their choice. Currently Arabic is required on public signs, and preference is given in jobs to those fluent in it.
"The demand for the abolition of sharia courts in Britain, as elsewhere, is not an attack on people's right to religion; it is a defence of human rights, especially since the imposition of sharia courts is a demand of Islamism to restrict citizens' rights."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2010/jul/0...ous-courts