Qur'an a Code for living a good life

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by Witness123

 

Thats like asking Christians...."Why do you think your brothers end up molesting children?"

Why do imams endorse molesting children? And who said anything about Catholics? I'm not a Catholic and that is not the same religion as Protestant Christianity. Why don't you share how when the Catholics were allied with Hitler in WW2, the Moslems in the Middle East joined with them?

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
and rationalizing that these biblical instructions to abstain from marriage is why the church is full of child molestors.

By the church you mean the Catholics. There is a difference, the same way there is a difference between Sunnis and Shi'a and they mostly want to kill each other in fundamentalist cultures.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
My kind would be anybody who has basic decency to NOT judge an entire religion or people on the actions of a few.

Why do you want East Jerusalem then unless you were an anti-Semite?

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
The grand Mufti is not my leader. Also, Muslims saved Jews during WW2.

Prove it or it's taqqiya.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
Regarding Catholics... they happen to be Christians, not muslims. So why are you bundling your fellow Christians with Muslims?

Because they are two separate entities. The Catholics are not the same as the Protestant church.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n

Funny coming from an anti-semite, but I'm not prejudiced against Muslims.

a) Its hard to be an anti-semite when 90% of Islams prophets are Israelite.
b)You say you are not prejudiced, yet you don't mind judging all muslims based on the actions of a few terrorists.

I'm going to need to see where I did that. And a few terrorists? There are probably at least a few terrorists blowing themselves up everyday for Allah in the Middle East, that would be 1000 a year.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
Honor killings take place even among hindus and Sikhs.
The Israel situation is completely political...
Gaddhafis a######..... ouch.... but he was killed by an angry mob. They didn't kill him for religious reasons.

Two wrongs don't make a right. It doesn't prove me wrong to say, "But everyone else is doing it too." It's still barbaric and the societies where this occurs don't seem to care, they look the other way when it happens.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n

We aren't saying this because we're biased euro-centric Americans, we're saying it because your culture is a barbaric society that thrives off of violence and murder.

Same can be said about the entire Western civilization.... based off the two World Wars... its subjugation of cultures in South America, Africa, Asia.... slavery... etc. etc.
So stop telling yourself you are all good and holy.

I'm no more guilty for what people did 500 years ago then you are for what your own people are doing today, and logic would seem to say you're more guilty because the crimes of the Muslim nations are taking place today.

Slavery obviously was something that the Mohammedans practiced very early on and were leaders in the slave trade when Europeans made it to Africa. The Moors occupied Spain for quite a few years and killed people along the way, how is that different from what some of the Spanish did in the Americas?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
Also you did not address the part about the violent beginnings of Israelite culture. What about the genocide and baby killing in the Old Testament? It wasn't always all "turn the other cheek", was it?

Sorry, I don't remember children being killed, but I do remember the Catholics trying that some time back. I remember they wandered into Egypt and it wasn't long before they were made slaves and then they went into the land of Israel and got in a few fights along the way. You can call that genocide if you want, but they really just had a dominant military strength, that was all. North Africa didn't become Islamic by your evangelists going and planting trees, doing humanitarian work, and giving back to society.

reply to post by Witness123


you dint take my advice about the 'general rule'

the things you posted are as disgusting to me as to you.

The justification that you give from Muhammad's(pbuh) life is not true.

I can answer this as it is at least partly related to behaviour of muslims.
The idea of Ayesha(r.a) as child bride is taken from a single narration that mentions her age as 6(at marriage) and 9(at consumation)
however there are other records that Ayesha was born in pre islamic era and the prophet married her only after hijrah(migration) which happened 13 years after he started preaching.

According to Sahih Bukhari (which is
the most authentic) of the hadiths!
According to Sahih Bukhari, Aisha
(R.A.) is reported to have said that at
the time Surah Al-Qamar, the 54th Chapter of
the Quran, was revealed, "I was a
young girl"
The 54th surah of The Quran was
revealed nine years before Hijrah. So
Aisha (R.A.) was a young girl (jariyah), and not an infant (sibyah) at that time!

so she was 3-7 years of age and that was 9 years before hijah.
The prophet married her a year after hijrah
so her age at marriage was at least 13 years minimum and maybe upto 17 years old.
Other sources point even to older age, like she was 10 years younger to her sister Asma and Asma was 28 when Ayesha got married, that give 18 years.

It is a known fact that the Asma, (the
elder sister of Aisha (R.A.)) was 10
years
older than Aisha (R.A.). It is reported
that Asma died 73 years after Hijrah when
she was 100 years old! Now, Obviously if Asma was 100 years
old 73 years after Hijrah, then Asma
s hould have been 27 or 28 years old
at the time of Hijrah! If Asma was 27 or
28 years old at Hijrah, then Aisha
(R.A.) would be 17 or 18 years old at Hijrah!

these sources are equally authentic and more in number than just the one used to reach your opinion.
So what is more likely to be true? You decide.