NEWS: Afghan Law: Reject Islam, You Die

Originally posted by Odium

Why not allow them to deal with things on their own...that is what was given to the "Freedom", Freedom to rule their nation how they the people feel. Not how citizen's of the United State's like.

How would you feel if the Europeans reenacted their laws prohibiting Islam and Judaism? They are free to make their own laws so I assume you would have no problem with it.

Originally posted by intrepid
..................
Basically? A smokescreen. Damage control comes to mind.

Riiight....and weren't people claiming that the war on terrorism was just a smokescreen for 1. oil, 2. to spread Christianity?....

I for one don't see any of the oil some people were yelling and bashing away making claims we were going to steal all their oil away, and as for changing their religious views...you can see it yourself with the information on this thread....

We did not take the oil from Iraq back in Gulf War I, and we are not taking the oil now either, in fact it is Iraqis who are paying almost nothing on gas, what is it 5 cents per gallon?

Are there some American companies that have reconstruction contracts in Iraq and are making money?... Yes, did you expect that after the U.S. spend most money than any other nation, the U.S government would give the reconstruction program to French companies, or a small mom and pop's around the block kind of company?

[edit on 20-3-2006 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by Nygdan
... Also, the title of this article is misleading, its talking about apostates, not mere non-beleivers, for what its worth. A christian in afghanistan can't be prosecuted under this law.

I don't think it's misleading at all. Apostates are those that reject their religion. In Christianity, if you reject your faith you may be disfellowshiped, disowned, or shunned in some extreme cases. On the other hand, some Christians may still consider the apostate as 'saved' even if they don't themselves. As I think TC mentioned earlier, it is a condition between you and God. In this form of Islamic law, however, being an apostate is a capital crime.

Also, notice that the middle east is one of the most religiously diverse regions on the planet, whereas europe is the least, thats because christianity destroyed all non-christian religions in the area, whereas islam didn't do that in its region, so lets not pretend that islam is more destructive than christianity.

I haven't the slightest idea how or where you are getting this shtuff. Do you have any evidence to back this up? Do you honestly think that Christianity has had a monopoly on the religion of Europe for the last 2000 years?

As far as it having happened in the past, so what? It was wrong then, and its wrong now. We see christians killing peopel that they beleive aren't religious enough every now and then also, like in abortion clinic bombings.

Well I guess we agree on one thing - it is wrong. But your comparison to the Eric Rudolph types is competely ridiculous. On the one hand, the actions of a few extremists were more or less immediately and universally repudiated by all of mainstream Christianity, while the other is an official state policy

As far as islam goes, peopel who don't accept islam are entirely seperate from peopel that accept it, and then later reject it. The one are non-beleivers, the other are apostates and apparently their apostasy is seen as an attack upon islam, which must be defended against.

OHHHH I see. That makes it perfectly acceptable. They're only killing their own people. Clearly, not quite as bad.

So its not evidence that muslims are trying to take over the world, hell I expect that there are many muslims that are entirely against this idea, let alone agianst the idea that there should be sharia law in the first place.

Prove it. Post a link. I'd would love to read it and see what the muslim community is doing to help make the world a better, more peaceful, more tolerant place to live in.

Grover I agree our founding principles are not common to the rest of the world and I don't advocate trying to shove them down the throat of everyone else. However, we did win a war in Afganistan and we did let them decide how to run their government, but since we are there and since we can protect human rights we should do so. It isn't like we would be asking them to reject their faith or anything, just insisting they respect the basic freedoms of human beings. They can shun him, or blackball him, or whatever other social stigmas they feel compelled to apply, but no imprisonment and no death penalty for what the man believes.

[edit on 20-3-2006 by Astronomer68]

Originally posted by Astronomer68
Grover I agree our founding principles are not common to the rest of the world and I don't advocate trying to shove them down the throat of everyone else. However, we did win a war in Afganistan and we did let them decide how to run their government, but since we are there and since we can protect human rights we should do so. It isn't like we would be asking them to reject their faith or anything, just insisting they respect the basic freedoms of human beings. They can shun him, or blackball him, or whatever other social stigmas they feel compelled to apply, but no imprisonment and no death penalty for what the man believes.

[edit on 20-3-2006 by Astronomer68]

I will agree with that. I was not by the way supporting the law, I was trying to point out the contexts.

These people are largely illiterate and uneducated. You cannot expect anything more from them. As an example, in India a large majority of people are illiterate and uneducated, and as a result they still have their damn caste system and millions live in shanty towns in there own filth.

Here in the US a large majority of the people are literate and educated, and as a result we do not have such standards of living, albeit we have some odd laws but nothing as bad as a large part of the rest of the world, inlcuding this law in Afghanistan.

Seriously, people have to respect each other to a certain degree, educate themselves, and work hard in to build themselves out of this sort of #.

Thomas Crowne, I love your posts.

They are so amusing. You say the US was founded as a Christian nation, which is false. But, let's pretend that was true.

Which version of the 10 commandments would be the basis of US law? There's 3 to choose from.

Which of the total 613 commandments would make the law cut?

I would like to see the following become law (this is straight from the bible):

We could stone gay men to death for the crime of being gay.

We could put a "sorceress" to death. I guess psychics, witches, etc. are sorceresses, if they're female.

Jews could enslave non-Jews. Christians would be free to enslave other Christians, though.

You could beat the shot out of your slaves, as long as they don't die within 2 days.

Any time a person killed another (manslaughter, murder, negligent homicide) they would get the death penalty.

It would be against the law to sex a woman on her period (no tag during the rag , couldn't resist that one).

Bestiality, besides being weird porn, would be punishable by death.

Hey, a Christian nation sounds pretty great!

On topic, these Muslims here are just as insane as the Christians. Forget vote or die, it's convert (re-convert ) or die! Seriously, religion either brain damages you or really appeals to brain damaged people. Trust me, I know people who have lead me to this assertion.

But hey, this part of the "new freedom!" We stomp the damn Taliban, and opium production goes up 2000%. TWO THOUSAND PERCENT!!! I saw this on 60 minutes. At one point, the po pos there had confiscated 2.5 tons of smack, which is supposedly more than the biggest smack bust in the US or something. They had the smack just sitting there in the police station!

Now, in the "liberated" Afghanistan, we have convert or die. Nice to see that we Americans do such a great job liberating countries. Now if we could just get to the Sudan, Belarus, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Bolivia, Jordan, etc.

Originally posted by truthseeka
Thomas Crowne, I love your posts.

They are so amusing. You say the US was founded as a Christian nation, which is false. But, let's pretend that was true.
...............

I am not a Christian, but i do have to agree with TC on this.

Tell us exactly what this means.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--

Excerpted from.
www.archives.gov...

As long as there is religious freedom, why would people from other religions deny the truth that the United States was created with mainly Christian doctrines?

Were there atrocities being committed by those who followed the old mandates of the bible before the appearance of Christ? unfortunately yes.

There is nothing we can do about the past, we must worry about the future. Now tell us where does the new doctrines that are now accepted as the true doctrines of Christianity says it is alright to stone gays....or any of the other things you claimed?.....

There are other religions that do not allow for change and still accept the old views of "killing those who do not believe in your doctrine", but it isn't Christianity. Were there attrocities that were committed by some Christians after Christ died? Yes, but none of what they did was part of what Christ taught.

You will always find exceptions to the rule. Buddhism is one religion which teaches to respect all life, and depending on the branch of Buddhism that people follow even insects are sacred and shouldn't be killed. But you also find some Buddhists who are on that same path and branch of that way of life that have also used death and violence to oppose for example the Chinese. But as a whole those actions are not sanctioned in Buddhist doctrine, unless you follow the path of Japanese Zen Buddhism.


---edited to correct statement---

[edit on 21-3-2006 by Muaddib]

OK...

That sure is vague. Strange that you can automatically assume Christian here. Looks more like pagans than anything to me. Come on, Nature's God?

Nice try, but next time find something where they explicitly said that the US would be a Christian nation bound by Christian biblical law. Some of the founders were Christians, but some were also atheists.

Originally posted by AceOfBase

Originally posted by Odium

Why not allow them to deal with things on their own...that is what was given to the "Freedom", Freedom to rule their nation how they the people feel. Not how citizen's of the United State's like.

How would you feel if the Europeans reenacted their laws prohibiting Islam and Judaism? They are free to make their own laws so I assume you would have no problem with it.

Where do I say I agree with the law?

How would you like it, if they came to the United Kingdom and introduced sharia law? Exactly.

I don't like the law, however it will be removed by the people and not by us attacking them once more.

Originally posted by truthseeka
OK...

That sure is vague. Strange that you can automatically assume Christian here. Looks more like pagans than anything to me

. Come on, Nature's God?

Nice try, but next time find something where they explicitly said that the US would be a Christian nation bound by Christian biblical law. Some of the founders were Christians, but some were also atheists.

First of all, pagans worship a female deity, a Goddess, not a God.

Second, the text does make references to all men being created by this God. How many religions were around at that time that had these beliefs as doctrines in the U.S.? and what sort of religions were they based on?

I don't have anything against religious freedom, people should be allowed to worship whatever deities, Gods, God, or Godesses they believe in, but I will not try to use this as an excuse to obscure the truth on what beliefs the declaration of independence, and this nation is based on.

I have my own beliefs, many which are similar to other religions that are not Christian, but I am also in favor of the truth. I don't think "facts should be changed to make the United States a secular nation, or a nation which main beliefs were based on religions which were probably not even known in those times by the founding fathers."


[edit on 21-3-2006 by Muaddib]

Muadib...Many Neo-Pagans "may" worship a Goddess...but that is not exclusive. There are Pagans who worship both a God and Goddess, as well as just a God. A Pagan is quite a broad range of religious views, simply not "mainstream" religion.
From dictionary.com:
1. One who is not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew, especially a worshiper of a polytheistic religion.
2. One who has no religion.
3. A non-Christian.
4. A hedonist.
5. A Neo-Pagan.

However, if we refer back to your previous quote regarding our Declaration of Independance, I would have to give my two cents in that the Nature's God referred to is of Deist origin.

What about those who do not believe in the existance of God? Surely it is placeing only those who belive above those who do not by including the term?

I'm not a big fan of any document that uses, race, religion, creed, culture, et al ways to define people. I tend to find it can cause more problems than it stops. In fact, which can be seen by such a debate even happening. However the clarity of legislation and documents, is never...what it is intended to be.

i just read the first page and last comment. well nobody should impose on others their religion.

the best things that men can do is study each one and decide to adopt one or his own. the world would be a better place if they did.

Peace out, LeMagnifique

killed.Shariah law states that Muslims who reject their religion should be killed.

One flaw in this statement, how can he be a muslim if he's rejected the religion? he's not a muslim, catholic, Islamic or anything? what a stupid rule!

Originally posted by truthseeka
Thomas Crowne, I love your posts.

They are so amusing. You say the US was founded as a Christian nation, which is false. But, let's pretend that was true.

Which version of the 10 commandments would be the basis of US law? There's 3 to choose from.

Which of the total 613 commandments would make the law cut?

Jesus came to earth to make the Old Testament laws obsolete. Except for the one about gays being bad. He meant to keep that one, but the rest, the bad or inconvenient ones, yeah, they're gone because of JC.

One of the big problems, I've noticed again is the understanding of sharia. There are two types, the first is what all Muslim's should do the second was added after to protect Islam. The second is where you find much of the problems with Islam, including this topic and the majority of Muslim's do not live by it.

However, if we run around telling them not to it runs a risk of more of them doing it. This man, although in an unlucky position will do more harm by the trial than we will be killing more of them.

This is why I despise Islam 0 tolerance of other faiths but there......Some Days I just wish that an asteroid would hit the Whole area......And why I think in a war against Extremists you hit them were it hurts IF Iran Attacks the jewish people we Nuke Mecca and Medina

Originally posted by Truth_Hunter_1976
This is why I despise Islam 0 tolerance of other faiths but there......Some Days I just wish that an asteroid would hit the Whole area......And why I think in a war against Extremists you hit them were it hurts IF Iran Attacks the jewish people we Nuke Mecca and Medina

So by your logic, if they attack Iran it's fine to nuke Israel?

Yes! That's what the World needs, even more death and destruction.

Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by intrepid
..................
Basically? A smokescreen. Damage control comes to mind.

Riiight....and weren't people claiming that the war on terrorism was just a smokescreen for 1. oil, 2. to spread Christianity?....

I for one don't see any of the oil some people were yelling and bashing away making claims we were going to steal all their oil away, and as for changing their religious views...you can see it yourself with the information on this thread....

We did not take the oil from Iraq back in Gulf War I

[snip]

What are you talking about? I never mentioned oil at all. I was addressing this:

originaly posted by iori_komei
What surprises me is why Bush actually allowed them to have there own law system, I'd have figured he'd make them have a law system similiar to ours.

My post pointed out that if you screwed with their belief system it would go over like a lead zepplin.

And that leaving things as they are is a smokescreen to the Iraqi people.

Oil? Sheesh.