KAFIR

[Angrboda]

Atlas,

Your view takes a strict normative meaning of kafir without acknowledging its emotive connotations evolved through its use.  You must certainly understand that kafir is frequently used as an invective. What are the consequences to Muslims subject to takfir?  You can take exception to evolving use of language, but it can't be ignored.

American football commentators started abusing the word differential to refer to a difference in score or some other performance statistic.  I continue to loathe its misuse; however, I understand the meaning conveyed and it's ubiquitous use suggests that I would be foolish to expect a return of its original meaning.  The same can be said of kafir 's use.  It's evolved connotative meaning
will likely never return to its strict literal and normative definition.

The invective use of the word is an indication for how ignorant and gullible the user of the word is.
It is an indication of how the user -who uses the word out of emotional snaps for invective reasons- is turning Islam into a personal property, and turning such a word into a slur.

I didn't use it as a slur. I used it just as it was used in the Quran: to describe rejects of the message of Mohammed.

You are referring to a wide custom of using this word as a slur; as a curse; but I'm stating its real meaning in the OP. Using it like that is a mere superiority-complex mixed with ignorant mentality.

The 'real' meaning of a word is determined by how that word is used, not by some semantic archeological enterprise. You are guilty of the genetic fallacy here. No, using a word in the manner that it is currently used is not any superiority-complex mixed with ignorance, rather it is you who is demonstrating his ignorance by not understanding how words work. Both you and Mystic make this same stupid argument, that current usage is in some sense false, and that the preferred usage is some extinct meaning which no longer exists. You do this because you want to whitewash the truth, to cleanse the ugliness that is Islam by appealing to false arguments, historical revisionism, and a theory of privileging certain Islamic facts over others. In this you are no different than any other apologist who, unable to deny the ugliness that is Islam, attempt to create a false and non-existent Islam that does not contain the ugliness, and argue that this cleansed version of Islam is the real Islam. It is not. Islam is dirty and disgusting, and as its apologist, you're nothing but a hero in favor of Muslim and Arab atrocities. You are responsible, Atlass. You are.