Islam is an Advocate of Peace, Not Terror

One thing that pisses me off is bigots who say destroy religion.
I am a Christian, I don't go to church or really read the bible (Excluding Genesis etc)
I am 9 yrs free of heroin/speed addiction thanks to Lord Jesus Christ giving me the Strength.
Personally I am willing to fight for that right to say YES I Am A Christian .. Don't Like That Then Get Away From Us And Don't Let The Door Hit Ya Fat Ass On The Way Out!!

reply to post by Burgo


I was reading through posts to see who I wanted to star, and stumbled on yours.

Then Get Away From Us And Don't Let The Door Hit Ya Fat Ass On The Way Out!!

Really, that's what we're saying to you, but you never leave us alone, do you? I don't care what you do, just don't subject me to it. Stop trying to work your religion into the public schools or governments, and I won't think twice about your religous beliefs.

By the way, at the end of the day, no matter how fat my arse gets, I still have a hot wife.


ETA:
I'm glad your clean man. Great job. Really, I mean it. I'm clean now too, but my bucket and mop wasn't Jesus.



[edit on 5-7-2010 by tamusan]

[edit on 5-7-2010 by tamusan]

Originally posted by queenannie38
there is no reason for anyone to discriminate, or hate, or fear Islam or it's adherents!

Sure there is.

Even amongst it's non-extremist followers, Islam, like Christianity, still has a very male-centric view of the world, where women are relegated to second class citizens, who do not have the same religious rights and equalities that men do.

In fact, I'm quite sure it's explicitly stated in the Qur'an that men are superior to women, to beat their disobedient wives and been rewarded virgins in the afterlife.

Sorry - complete rubbish. But hey - I'm not singling out Islam for being a rubbish belief system. All the rest of the organised religions are equally rubbish too.

Originally posted by Burgo
One thing that pisses me off is bigots who say destroy religion.
I am a Christian, I don't go to church or really read the bible (Excluding Genesis etc)
I am 9 yrs free of heroin/speed addiction thanks to Lord Jesus Christ giving me the Strength.
Personally I am willing to fight for that right to say YES I Am A Christian .. Don't Like That Then Get Away From Us And Don't Let The Door Hit Ya Fat Ass On The Way Out!!

So how did that work then? Did he infuse you with a form of energy? Was it extra willpower? Are you saying he artificially boosted your natural hormones and neurochemicals such that you found the strength to defeat your addictions?

Personally, I think you are doing YOURSELF a diservice. YOU overcame it yourself. No Jesus person or any external supernatural force. It was your own desire to overcome that helped you and you should be damned proud of your accomplishment.

And hey - if you're a Christian - great, good for you. Us atheists don't care. What we don't want is people of a religious nature getting into a position of political power who can then create laws that are influenced by a religious belief which is, generally, devoid of common sense.



[edit on 5-7-2010 by noonebutme]

reply to post by Burgo


Yeh exactly it was YOU and YOU alone who defeated your addictions.
not some belief in a semi mythological human being.

and yeh where is the suffragete movement in islamic countries ?

oh there is none , they barely even get the right to vote!
either that or they are subjected to threats of violence if they do vote

any religion that doesnt have equality for men and women is a disgrace

and yes religion is everywhere , how many non religious people do you see going around trying to convert you to being a non religious person NONE !

religion is on government "in god we trust" its in our courts . It rules us non believers

but im happy that all of you religious people believe in something , its just funny because everything in the bible is just encounters with aliens !

yaaay for ancient astronaut theory
your worshiping aliens

Islam wishes EVERYONE to submit to their Allah. That makes EVERYONE who is not Muslim their enemies, worthy of their Jihad. Don't you people understand this truth?

Sorry, I do NOT see peace here.

reply to post by sapien82


I am not saying that I believe bible encounters were in fact aliens, but I am open to that idea.

Most every religion and Holy Faith with a membership larger then say 10,000 people does have the tendency to cause and lead to violence.

I'm Holy Roman Catholic and all of us are shaped the same way, some ethnicities have features exclusive to themselves because that is what makes each unique and independant when compared to the broader group.

Religion works in a similiar fashion whereas pertaining to faith some celebrate The Great Sabbath on Friday, others on Saturday, others do it on Sunday so The broader picture that is trying to painted here is on whatever day you consider to be The Sabbath you are to see every day as The Sabbath and show respect for The Great Creator (whoever or however you see him/her/it!) by showing respect and caring for your fellow human.

This division in religion is being used for nothing more to keep us pitted one against the other as all TPTB see us is as entertainment. I don't know about anyone else but I perform for no one. The truth about aliens and extra terrestrials can be opened to us we unequivocally must come together under both racial and religious unity as only then shall we be able to fully embrace some race of people from another planet who has a very high lilekyhood of lokking nothing like us. The future is counting on us now in this overly crucial period of history that is unfolding before everyone's eyes now. We all are being called upon by The Great Creator to right the wrongs and reverse the trend we've been on for the last 1,000 or so years so that the next 1,000 and well beyond aren't anything like what we've experienced thus far.

Eliminate and delete the "Us - VS - Them" philophisy from your thinking and actions with regards to race, gender, faith, politics as that all will add to the problem instead of working towards a solution.

By and under orders of The Government Of The Divine is that no person is allowed to shed the blood of another as well as being strictly forbidden to take the life of another in the commission of any act of terrorism against anyone. Anyone who violates this will spend a minimum of 250 years in Hell per body. Kill under the name of your Great Creator without prior authourization, that's 500 years to start.

Further action is being considered by The Holy Family as to wether or not to bring a satisfactory and successful resolution to this infectious plauge that has unfortunately been thrust upon humanity at this current time. This just hinders things. All have it's radical sect whose quick to enact revenge as we've been told time and time again courtesy of multiple sources that we must be cool, calm and collected. For it not for this our current overall course would've been radically different.

The "72 Virgins" deal is no human versions. If someone is idiotic to fall for that nonsense that becomes to enticing to the point where it because pheasible and plausilble them some misinformed and unauthourized azzhat tries to get someone who from out the gate is clearly not too bright in the intelligience and common sense department and use The Great Creator to promise this kid who in the USA wouldn't even be old enough to buy a pack of smokes with delusions and visions of grandeur while promising his family some money. It is up to us intelligient ones with our feet planted firmly in reality and now to take the reigns and to use our vast knowlege and expertise to correctly guide the misinformed into the ideas of a new way. To show them that Martydom is not the answer. Put down the vest and pickup a book to learn. Let us not continually repeat the mistakes of the past. Remember, by merely giving someone that needed boost to their overall outlook you have the power to change that kids direction and path. No direction and no one telling them that they are worth something the likelyhood of the person being in prison or being a martyr by age 16 is 90%+ while that kid who was told he was worth it and told he could be someone the likelyhood they will stay focused on their future and make something of themselves reduces that rate well over 70% to about 15 - 25% making that kid a likely candidate for being a success story.

No 72 Virgins, you only get a virgin if that was the person you were meant to be with but never was. Especially in cases where the other person dies before losing thier virginity as on The Other Side everyone looks no older then 35. Child molestation cannot apply if the consumation is with that of 2 legal consenting adults by the way, regardless of sexual orientation which is another thing we need to be more tolerant of.

That is the 3 Largest Blocks In the World, capture them you can capture power.

Most turn to strapping a bomb to themselves are usually poor and with little to no family and very malnurioushed with little schooling and little hope. They can't learn because the school he could've went to got bombed by others, the place he could've went to an afterschool program is bombed and the place he could've gotten a job or ran a buisness got bombed. What hope does that give someone?

[edit on 5-7-2010 by TheImmaculateD1]

in regard to CURRENT thinking by non-radical *regular* Islam on the subject of women:

part one

I

The various aspects of the life of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) are all so sublime, that in the matter of choice, a writer on the subject soon finds himself baffled and selection becomes very nearly impossible. In consideration of present day needs, however, I wish to take up that side of the Holy Prophet’s life which concerns the way in which he purged the world of that form of utter slavery which had been for all time the curse of humanity. I mean the slavery of women.

Before the advent of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) women in all countries were in the position of slaves and chattels, and their slavery could not but have reacted adversely even on men; for sons of slaves cannot assimilate the spirit of freedom.

There is no doubt woman, either because of her beauty or because of her sterling character, has always been able, in individual cases, to dominate over men, but freedom thus obtained could not be termed true freedom, for the simple reason that it was not hers by way of right. It was only a matter of exception to the general rule, and freedom which is exceptional, can hardly lead to the culture of true aspirations.

The Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) had his advent about 1,350 years ago. Before his time, no religion or nation afforded to woman such freedom as she could use by way of right. Of course in countries where no law prevailed, she was free from all disabilities. Yet even this kind of freedom cannot be called true freedom. It is rather described as license. True freedom is that which is reaped out of a state of civilization and conformity to law. The sort of freedom we get when we break the bounds of the law is not freedom at all because such freedom does not generate any strength of character.

Muhammad the Liberator of Women

part two:

II

At the time of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and before, woman was placed in a condition in which she was not the owner of her property; her husband was regarded as the owner of her property. She did not have a share in the property of her father. Nor could she inherit the property of her husband, though in some cases she had the right of managing it during the husband’s lifetime. When married, she was either assigned to her husband for good as his property, and in no circumstances could she be separated from him; or in the alternative, it was given to the husband to divorce her but not given to her to separate herself from the husband, however afflicted she might have been.

Should the husband desert her, cease to discharge his obligations towards her or run away from her, there was no law to protect her. It was obligatory on her to be resigned to her lot, and work for a living both for herself and her children. The husband was entitled, out of bad temper, to beat his wife; she was not to raise a voice against it. Should the husband die, the wife, in some countries, fell into the hands of her husband’s relatives, who could then marry her to whomsoever they liked, either in charity or in return of some benefits received. In some places, on the other hand, she was merely the property of her husband. Some husbands would sell their wives or lose them in gambling and betting, and when they did so, they were all considered to be within their rights.

A woman had no right over her children whether in her position of dependence as wife, or in a position of independence of her husband. In domestic affairs she had no privilege. Even in religion she had no status. Of the abiding spiritual blessings, she was to have no share. In consequence, husbands used to squander the property of their wives and abandon them without providing for their subsistence. She could not, even out of her own property, give away, in charity, or help her relatives except with the consent of her husband, and a husband who looked with greed on the property of his wife could hardly give his consent in such a matter.

Of the property of her parents, to whom children are bound by a most deep and affectionate tie, woman was deprived of all share. And yet daughters have as much claim on their parents as have the sons. Parents who out of a sense of justice, would give away during their lifetime some of their property to their daughters, prepared only for strife in their families. It would not occur to the sons that after the parent’s death they (the sons) would inherit the whole of their property (and therefore should not grudge their sisters receiving occasional gifts from their parents); all they considered was that their sisters, for the time being were having more than they.

Of the property, similarly, of her husband -- with whom a wife has the relation of complete union -- woman was again, deprived altogether. Distant relatives of the husband could each claim a share, but not the wife -- one, indeed, who was the possessor of his confidence, a life-long partner of his and whose labour and care must have so largely contributed to his income. On the other hand, when she managed all her husband’s property, she did not have any genuine right over any portion of it. While she could spend out of the income of that property she could not dispose any part of it. In acts of charity, therefore, she was prevented from taking part in the manner she liked.

When the husband oppressed his wife, she could not be separated from him. In communities in which separation was at all possible, it was on conditions under which self-respecting women preferred death to separation. For instance, a condition of separation was that proof should be furnished establishing the misconduct of either party, as well as ill treatment on the part of the husband. What was still worse was that in cases in which it was impossible for a woman to live with her husband instead of complete separation, she was only allowed to live apart, a state of living which itself is a form of torture, for in this way she was compelled to lead an empty, purposeless life.

In some cases it happened that while the husband could divorce his wife whenever he liked, the wife in no case could demand a divorce. If the husband deserted her, or abandoned the country without providing for her, she was obliged to linger through life without the right to devote herself usefully to her country or community. Married life, instead of being a life of happiness, became for her a life of misery. Her obligation it was, not only to undertake the duties of her husband and of herself but also to wait for her husband. The duty of the husband, namely to find a living for the household, became hers, as also her own duty, the care and upbringing of her children?mental discomfort on the one hand, and material responsibilities on the other.

All this, in short, was tolerated in the case of this poor, unprotected creature. Women were beaten and considered the property of their husbands. When the husbands died, widows were forcefully married to the relatives of their husbands, or else sold for money. In fact, husbands themselves sold away their wives. Indian princes like the Panawas lost their wife (there was one for many) in gambling, and against the law of the land, a noble princess like Dropadi could not raise the slightest voice.

In the education or upbringing of their children, the mothers were not consulted and they had no rights over their children. If the father and mother separated, the children were handed over to the father. Woman had nothing to do with the household. Whenever the husband liked, he could drive her out of the house, and she was condemned to wander about homelessly.

Originally posted by Burgo
One thing that pisses me off is bigots who say destroy religion.
I am a Christian, I don't go to church or really read the bible (Excluding Genesis etc)
I am 9 yrs free of heroin/speed addiction thanks to Lord Jesus Christ giving me the Strength.
Personally I am willing to fight for that right to say YES I Am A Christian .. Don't Like That Then Get Away From Us And Don't Let The Door Hit Ya Fat Ass On The Way Out!!

dude totally sweet. you addicted yourself to drugs then used a shaman to unaddict yourself. i am humbled. did you get a token or jesus t-shirt or something?

YOU got addicted in the first place. thats the work of a genius. you made yourself believe in a fairytale. thats the work of a genius. i dont think its a coincidence that you were on herion. and therell be another addiction.

and you have a whole lotta hate in your heart also, hypocrite. you certainly dont realise that you do have the right to say that, but we dont have the right to call you out.

i dont think youre exactly brilliant. just the run of the mill zealot. certainly not smart enough to realise you caused it all. you always did. oh lemme guess, someone else made you wanna try herion? like as kids we used to look up to addicts? like as kids we were told it was cool to lose a hundred pounds and be thrown out of society? like we were told herion was for winners? i dont even have enough sarcasm for you... wait heres another, like we were told its cool to rob your family and eventually lose them? haha

i dont think you ever had a chance. wake up to your true strength and potential. you dont have to be nonchristian, just take responsibility for ALL of it.

untill then youre just nwo fodder

part three:

III

By the advent of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) all these iniquities were wiped away, as it were, with one stroke. He declared that God had particularly entrusted to him the task of safeguarding the rights of women.

He proclaimed in the name of God that man and woman by virtue of their humanity, were the equal of each other, and when they lived together, just as man had certain rights over woman, so had woman certain rights over man. Women could own property in the same way as men. A husband had no right to use the property of his wife, as long as the wife, of her own free will, did not let him have some of it. To seize her property by force, or in a manner which made it doubtful whether her natural shyness had not stood in the way of her refusal, was wrong. Whatever the husband of his own free will should give away to the wife, would be the property of the wife and the husband would not be able to take it back from her. She was to inherit the property of her parents just as well as her brothers. Only considering that all the family responsibilities fall on man, and woman’s concern is her own self alone, her share was to be one half of the share of man, that is, out of the property of their (deceased) parents.

Similarly a mother was to have a share in the property of her (deceased) son as well as the father. Only according to differing circumstances and the nature of her responsibilities in particular cases, she was to have a share at times equal to, and at times less than that of the father. On the death also of her husband she was to inherit, whether or not there were any children, because she was not to be condemned to a state of dependence on others.

Her marriage (it was granted) is, without doubt, a holy alliance, which, after man and woman have cultivated mutual intimacy to the extreme, it is very detestable to break. However, it cannot be that, even after a frightful divergence of nature has been found between the parties, or in spite of a religious, physical, economic, social or mental discrepancy between them, they should be compelled, in the interest of sheer alliance, to ruin their lives and kill the purpose of their existence.

When differences of this kind appear, and man and woman agree that they cannot live together, they can (it was taught), by mutual consent, revoke the alliance. If, however, only the husband should take this view, but not the wife, and if they fail to adjust themselves to each other, their affairs should be considered by a committee of two members, one representing the husband and the other the wife. If the committee should decide that the parties should yet make an effort to live together, it would be worthwhile on their part to try to settle their differences in the way recommended by the committee. Then if the understanding along this line should prove impossible, the husband could divorce the wife, but in such a case he would have no right to the return of whatever he might have (before divorce) given away to her, including the full value of mahr (marriage settlement).

If, on the other hand, the wife should seek separation, and not the husband, she should apply to the Qazi (Judge), and if the Qazi is satisfied that there is no unfair motive behind her application, he should order her separation. Only in such a case she will make over to the husband such of his property as had been entrusted to her, as also the value of mahr (marriage settlement). Should the husband fail to fulfil his marital obligations or cease to speak to her, or should ask her to sleep apart, he should not be able to go beyond a certain limit of time. If he persists for four months in this kind of treatment, he should be compelled either to reform himself or to divorce her.

Should he stop the allowances due to the wife or go away from her and no longer take care of her, their marriage should be regarded as null and void. (Three years have been assigned as the limit of the period of abandonment by Muslim jurists). The wife would now be free to marry again.

The husband was always to be responsible for the maintenance of his wife and children. He was to exercise only appropriate discipline, but should this discipline ever take the form of punishment, he should have proper witnesses and declare her guilt and base his judgment on evidence. Punishment should not leave any permanent ill effects behind.

A husband does not own his wife. He cannot sell her, nor reduce her to the office of domestic drudge. His wife shares with him the amenities of the household, and his treatment of her will have to correspond to the position to which he himself belongs. A treatment which is below that which should belong to the status of the husband would be wrong.

On the death of her husband, his people were to have no right over her. She would be free, and a suitable opportunity occurring, she would have the right to marry again. Nobody can stop her from doing so. Nor can a widow be compelled to live in a particular place. Only for about four months and ten days, she would live in her husband’s house, so that all those conditions which can have a bearing on her rights and on those of her husband’s people, should have time to manifest themselves.

For a year after the death of her husband a widow, whatever else is due to her, is to have in addition, the use of her husband's house, so that she should be able, out of what has been left to her, to make arrangements for her residence.

Should the husband find himself not on good terms with his wife, he himself is to keep out of the house, not ask his wife to go out of it, because the household is supposed to be the possession of the wife. In the upbringing of the children, woman has her part. She is to be consulted.

In the matter of children, her interest is not to be ignored in any way. Wet nursing, general caretaking, are to depend on her advice. If husband and wife, finding it impossible any more to live together, should want to separate from each other, the care of the small children should be entrusted to the mother. When they grow up, they should for purpose of education, come back to the father. As long as the children live with their mother, maintenance would be provided for by the father. The father would also pay for the time and labour the mother would have to spend on account of the children.

Woman, in short, was to have an independent status. All the spiritual rewards were to be open to her. She was to command the highest excellences of life after death and even in this life she could take part in the different departments of civil administration. In this regard she was to have the same consideration paid to her claims as that accorded to man.

part four:

IV

This is the teaching which the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) promulgated at a time when the standards of the world were altogether opposed to it. Through these injunctions, he reclaimed women from the slavery which had been their lot for thousands of years, to which they were forced in every land, and the yoke of which every religion had put on their neck. One man, in one time, cut asunder all these chains of serfdom! Bringing freedom to mothers, he at the same time saved their children from slavish sentiments, and provided for the germination and nourishment of great ambition and high resolve!

However, the world did not value the teachings. What was indeed a boon, it branded as tyranny. Divorce and separation it regarded as strife, inheritance as ruining the family, independence of woman as means of the disruption of domestic life. For thirteen hundred years, it went on ridiculing, in its blindness, the things which this one man who could see, had communicated to mankind for their good. It went on condemning his teachings as against human nature. Then came the time when the exquisiteness of the word of God (transmitted through the Holy Prophet) should reveal itself. The very peoples who looked upon themselves as the bearers of civilization, began to obey the civilizing injunctions of the Holy Prophet. Everyone of these peoples in turn, changed their laws in increasing conformity to the principles preached by the Holy Prophet (on whom be peace).

The English Law which required misconduct, ill treatment and beating on the part of either party as essential conditions of divorce, was changed in 1923. Misconduct by itself was accepted by the new law as a sufficient excuse for divorce.

New Zealand decided, in 1912, that a wife who has been insane for seven years, should have her marriage dissolved. In 1925, it further ruled that if either husband or wife should not discharge his or her marital obligations, they could be allowed a divorce or separation. If three years elapse without one caring for the other, divorce was in order. A good imitation of Muslim jurists, of course, but made after 1,300 years of attacks on Islam!

In the Australian State of Queensland, insanity of five years’ duration was regarded as a sufficient reason for divorce. In Tasmania, a law was passed in 1919 that misconduct, desertion for four years, drunkenness, indifference for three years, imprisonment, beating, insanity, should, one and all, be sufficient conditions of divorce. In Victoria, law was passed in 1923 that should a husband fail to look after his wife for three years, be guilty of misconduct, refuse allowances, or ill-treat his wife, divorce would be possible. Further, it was granted that imprisonment, beating, misconduct on the part of the wife, insanity, unfair treatment and constant strife shall be sufficient excuses for divorce or separation.

In Western Australia, besides the laws outlined above, the marriage of a pregnant woman has been declared to be void. (Islam, too, holds the same view).

In the island of Cuba it was decided in 1918 that forcing into misconduct, beating, using foul language, undergoing conviction, drunkenness, gambling habit, failure to discharge obligations, refusing allowances, infectious disease, or mutual agreement, shall be accepted as sufficient conditions for divorce or separation.

Italy enacted in 1919 that a woman shall have rights over her property. She can spend out of it in charity or sell it as she likes (Up to this time, in Europe, she was not recognized as the owner of her own property).

In Mexico, too, the above conditions have been accepted as being sufficient for divorce. Besides, mutual agreement has also been accepted as sufficient. This law has been passed in 1917. Portugal in 1915, Norway in 1909, Sweden in 1920, and Switzerland in 1912, have passed laws by which divorce and separation have been made permissible. In Sweden, a father is compelled by law to provide, at least up to eighteen years, for the maintenance of every child of his.

In the United States of America although the law of the land continues to maintain the right of a father over his child, yet in practice the judges have begun to pay regard to the susceptibilities of mothers, and a father is now even compelled to pay for the children (living with their mother). There are, of course many drawbacks in their law. Even though, the man’s rights have been more strictly guarded, woman is being allowed to exercise right over the property. At the same time, in many States it has been passed that if the husband should become a permanent invalid, his wife will have to provide for him.

Women are now being granted the right to vote, and avenues are being opened by which they can come to have a voice in matters of national concern. Yet all these things are coming after full thirteen hundred years have passed since the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) promulgated his teachings. There are many things which yet await coming. In many countries a woman has still no share in the inheritance of either her parents or her husband. Similarly, in several other matters Islam continues to provide guidance to the world, though the world has not acknowledged such guidance. The time is not distant, however, when the world will accept the guidance coming from the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) in these matters as it has already done in others, and which the Holy Prophet initiated on behalf of the freedom of women will bring forth its fruits to the full.

Muslims for peace need to aim their efforts at the Physco terrorists & mad mullahs that are killing innocents in the name of their god rather than saying to non-muslims on the side of buses "its all your fault, stop hating us"

which is the idea i get from this story

if "muslims for peace" get rid of these hate-preachers of islam who want to dominate the world then there would be no need for the ads

and extreme muslims are muslims no matter what people say...stop denying it

Muslim families help thwart terrorism, nationwide phenomena

Booyah, in your face!

Please pardon that outburst - it's just that American Muslims are extremely excited that widespread media is acknowledging that Muslims have and continue to help thwart terrorists in the US. Even if that means ratting out a relative.

Back in December, a Nigerian young man attempted to detonate a bomb on NWA Flight arriving in our very own Detroit. Later it is revealed that his father, a wealthy banker in Nigeria, had made several attempts to notify government officials about the concerns he had regarding his own son.

Apparently this is not something unique to one state; evidently Muslims reporting on other 'muslims' who are involved in extremism and radical activities is becoming quite the nationwide trend.

Why? Because the vast majority of Muslims, that is, the truly educated, practicing followers of Islam, know that terrorism is completely outside Islamic traditions and teachings. And finally, it seems non-Muslims are becoming cognizant of this fact.

According to the article linked above, "Muslims said they supported the decisions of the suspects' families to help authorities." The president of the New Jersey Council of Mosques, Yaser El-Menshawy, goes on to say, "It's actually our duty, because of the safety of our families, and our country, and the safety of our people here. It's more important than a stupid guy trying to do a stupid act."

source

Islam hasn't evolved beyond the eyes to eyes and teeth to teeth to mentality. It hasn't gone beyond that. If the original religious leader has that level of mentality, then what else can you expect from its followers.

Religion is supposed to teach the highest moral conduct.

Love your enemy and kill your own selfishness. This is the highest level of moral standard.

Of course, no one can do that. That's why it becomes the ultimate ideal goal of the human conduct to achieve.

But who can't hate you back when hated by you. Who can't love you back when loved by you.

Islam condones the killings of the enemy of Islam. This is no higher moral conduct than the common criminal institutions like mafia, gangs etc..

Unless you can genuinely criticize the teachings of this devilish prose of the Quran, what's the use of this peace nonsense.

Peace? What do you mean by peace, Moslems? Tell me what peace is.

No peace for you in your inner self when you have to constantly vigilant on who might oppose Mohammed's teachings to make a revenge.

No peace in the world as long as Moslems do not abandon Islam's evil teachings.

The truth is this. You can not bring peace to the world by resorting to revenge.

Islam does not recognize this truth and that makes it an evil and inferior form of a religion at the most.

source

Muslim group calls for all American Muslims to unite against terrorism

May 13th: In the wake of the failed Times Square bombing, a major Muslim group in America, the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, is calling for all Muslims to unite against terrorism. Last week, the VP of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA Chapter, Imam Naseem Mahdi, wrote several Op Ed's and interviewed on Fox News and NBC news to condemn the attempted attack. He called for all Muslims living in America to remain loyal to America; and if they cannot be loyal, to be bold and leave.

Today, Dr. Faheem Younus, National President of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA Youth Auxiliary echoed those sentiments. In a live interview with Fox News he re-emphasized that Islam requires a Muslim to remain loyal to the country in which he or she resides.

He went on to stress the importance of young Muslims in America to recognize this fundamental teaching of Islam. Dr. Younus again called for all American Muslims to rally behind this effort, and root out extremism wherever it exists. He said, "..Most Muslims are peace-loving, nice people. And that's what our effort is. We want everyone to join with us. We want that movement. We are leading that movement..."

Today at 11am, a press conference was held to further reinforce this message of peace. We will report on that press conference as soon as possible. Dr. Younus' live Fox News interview is below.

(click on source link if you want to see the video of the live Fox News interview)

Dave Chappelle, not another Muslim added to no fly list

July 4th, 2010 A celebrity news website reports that "Dave Chappelle Deemed 'Safety Risk' on Private Jet" yesterday morning for misbehavior.

What? Why? Dave Chappelle? The super funny guy? The Muslim?

Yes, that's right! Some of you reading likely don't know that Dave Chappelle is a practicing Muslim. He even attended salatul jumah at the Islamic Center of Ann Arbor a few years ago according to community members. And earlier this year Chappelle's mother, also a Muslim, was the guest of honor at a Muslim Students' Association event on the UM campus.

OK, so about the plane incident and the whole "flight risk" thing: Apparently Dave Chappelle was not feeling well while traveling on a private jet from New Jersey to Ohio, his reported state of residence. He allegedly hassled the pilot while trying to obtain arrival-time information. The pilot did not react well to this, determined Chappelle a "safety risk" and made an immediate landing. Umm, melodramatic much?

The article made it sound like Chappelle was "erratic" and "crazy" when in fact the man was having stomach related issues and jet facilities were not accommodating, as informs a rep for the comedian. And maybe, being a funny guy, Chappelle attempted to add some humor to the situation which may have been mistaken for something else by the pilot.

The jet didn't land in Michigan but I can only imagine that if it had, Dave Chappelle would have been warmly received and well accommodated. Ann Arbor Muslims LOVE Dave Chappelle; especially the MSA brothers! Come visit us again at any time, inshaAllah.

source

--------------

i sure hope none of you anti-islam extremists were fans of Dave's!
because now you can't be!
:shk:

Originally posted by notsoperfect
But who can't hate you back when hated by you. Who can't love you back when loved by you.

Oh How True!!!

Unless you can genuinely criticize the teachings of this devilish prose of the Quran, what's the use of this peace nonsense.

here ya go:

Mission Statement

I.S.L.A.M. is dedicated to providing a fresh yet theologically valid interpretation of the Holy Quran and other Islamic texts.

Our goal is to revive Islam, save it from anachronistic interpretations, and make it a true power to support the values of liberty and humanity.

Our approach incorporates the following three principles:

1. A probing analysis of the subtleties and complexities of the Arabic language - specifically etymologically and syntactically - in order to develop a more precise understanding of the Quran and the message it offers.

2. Knowledge of the historical circumstances which occasioned the revelation of key Quranic verses, since historical context is pivotal to fully understanding the many (otherwise arcane) allusions, subtleties, and asides that permeate the Quran, and that make the Quran much more than simply a book of rules and prohibitions.

3. Interpreting Quranic surras (i.e., chapters) and verses holistically, in order to better appreciate their overall significance and synergistic qualities, rather than individually, which only leads to literal interpretations that do not take into account counter-verses and even whole segments of the Quran.

4- Use of Cognitive Psychology to provide effective educational Models for young Muslims in order to consolidate the values of peace, love, and harmony into their minds instead of the values of hatred and intolerance.

I.S.L.A.M. respects the efforts of other Islamic scholars - past, present, and future - and seeks to build upon their work a more precise interpretation that better represents the true spirit of Islam. We also appreciate the feedback and involvement of other Islamic scholars and Muslims who have a sincere desire to understand and/or practice Islam in its peaceful form.

source

in deed!

sounds like they've had the very same problem that we, in the west, have had with our holy bible!!!

IMAGINE that!!!

Originally posted by mav0360
untill then youre just nwo fodder

and you are unnecessarily rude and belittling to someone i assume you have never met?

to what purpose?

do you feel BIG now?
you should.