72 raisins to die

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: mOeeOm
No that is the whole point, she is not credible, ok I will try to explain it to you in a format that is easy to understand.

1) She says she is a Muslim.
2) She says she is a homosexual.
3) But a homosexual cannot be a Muslim, it is against the Quran.
4) Therefore she is not a Muslim.
5) Therefore she is not credible if she does not know a Muslim cannot be a homosexual, it shows she has very little knowledge of the Quran if she does not know this simple fact.

If she thinks she can be a homosexual AND a Muslim, then she doesn't know the basics of the Quran and she is not a credible source. Now say she didn't claim she is a Muslim, we might care what her argument is, but because she said she is a homosexual Muslim, she lost ALL credibility.

I'll repeat:

"Attempting to disassociate with her does not invalidate her message."

 

[mOeeOm]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: mOeeOm
No that is the whole point, she is not credible, ok I will try to explain it to you in a format that is easy to understand.

1) She says she is a Muslim.
2) She says she is a homosexual.
3) But a homosexual cannot be a Muslim, it is against the Quran.
4) Therefore she is not a Muslim.
5) Therefore she is not credible if she does not know a Muslim cannot be a homosexual, it shows she has very little knowledge of the Quran if she does not know this simple fact.

If she thinks she can be a homosexual AND a Muslim, then she doesn't know the basics of the Quran and she is not a credible source. Now say she didn't claim she is a Muslim, we might care what her argument is, but because she said she is a homosexual Muslim, she lost ALL credibility.

I'll repeat:

"Attempting to disassociate with her does not invalidate her message."

I'll repeat again:

No that is the whole point, she is not credible, ok I will try to explain it to you in a format that is easy to understand.

1) She says she is a Muslim.
2) She says she is a homosexual.
3) But a homosexual cannot be a Muslim, it is against the Quran.
4) Therefore she is not a Muslim.
5) Therefore she is not credible if she does not know a Muslim cannot be a homosexual, it shows she has very little knowledge of the Quran if she does not know this simple fact.

If she thinks she can be a homosexual AND a Muslim, then she doesn't know the basics of the Quran and she is not a credible source. Now say she didn't claim she is a Muslim, we might care what her argument is, but because she said she is a homosexual Muslim, she lost ALL credibility.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: mOeeOm
No that is the whole point, she is not credible, ok I will try to explain it to you in a format that is easy to understand.

1) She says she is a Muslim.
2) She says she is a homosexual.
3) But a homosexual cannot be a Muslim, it is against the Quran.
4) Therefore she is not a Muslim.
5) Therefore she is not credible if she does not know a Muslim cannot be a homosexual, it shows she has very little knowledge of the Quran if she does not know this simple fact.

If she thinks she can be a homosexual AND a Muslim, then she doesn't know the basics of the Quran and she is not a credible source. Now say she didn't claim she is a Muslim, we might care what her argument is, but because she said she is a homosexual Muslim, she lost ALL credibility.

I'll repeat:

"Attempting to disassociate with her does not invalidate her message."

I'll repeat again:

No that is the whole point, she is not credible, ok I will try to explain it to you in a format that is easy to understand.

1) She says she is a Muslim.
2) She says she is a homosexual.
3) But a homosexual cannot be a Muslim, it is against the Quran.
4) Therefore she is not a Muslim.
5) Therefore she is not credible if she does not know a Muslim cannot be a homosexual, it shows she has very little knowledge of the Quran if she does not know this simple fact.

If she thinks she can be a homosexual AND a Muslim, then she doesn't know the basics of the Quran and she is not a credible source. Now say she didn't claim she is a Muslim, we might care what her argument is, but because she said she is a homosexual Muslim, she lost ALL credibility.

Is being homosexual against the Quran, or only those who engage in same-sex behaviour?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_views_of_homosexuality

Islam presumes that a man will be drawn to beautiful youths, and admonishes the believer not to yield to temptation. Thus, homosexual desire and love are accommodated, but same-sex intercourse is prohibited, as Islam teaches that such intercourse is a violation of the natural boundaries set by Allah. Homosexuality as an attraction is not against the Sharia (which governs the physical actions, not the inner thoughts and feelings), it is only the physical action of same-sex intercourse that is punishable under the Sharia.

...

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: mOeeOm
1) She says she is a Muslim.
2) She says she is a homosexual.
3) But a homosexual cannot be a Muslim, it is against the Quran.
4) Therefore she is not a Muslim.
5) Therefore she is not credible if she does not know a Muslim cannot be a homosexual, it shows she has very little knowledge of the Quran if she does not know this simple fact.

1. That's because she is a Muslim.
2. Good for her.
3. A homosexual can be a Muslim.
4. Therefore she is a Muslim.
5. Nonsense. You are simply a homophobe trying to discredit someone's work.

I also enjoyed seeing someone scream 'racist' at aidanjm for comments about a religion when these people are essentially homophobes and haters.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: MegaWorks

Originally posted by: aidanjm

yeah, I'd say you qualify as pretty stupid.

I can tell you what a stupid person can be in this case.

- A person that tries to justify he's hate on a religion by delivering wrong information and claims that these are accurate facts!

- An ignoring person who refuses to get his information from a reliable source.

- A person that insults others after a discussion to prove his superiority.

Simple as that.

are you suggesting the bukhari hadith is not a "reliable source" of information about the life of Mohammed?

 

[MegaWorks]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: mOeeOm
No that is the whole point, she is not credible, ok I will try to explain it to you in a format that is easy to understand.

1) She says she is a Muslim.
2) She says she is a homosexual.
3) But a homosexual cannot be a Muslim, it is against the Quran.
4) Therefore she is not a Muslim.
5) Therefore she is not credible if she does not know a Muslim cannot be a homosexual, it shows she has very little knowledge of the Quran if she does not know this simple fact.

If she thinks she can be a homosexual AND a Muslim, then she doesn't know the basics of the Quran and she is not a credible source. Now say she didn't claim she is a Muslim, we might care what her argument is, but because she said she is a homosexual Muslim, she lost ALL credibility.

I'll repeat:

"Attempting to disassociate with her does not invalidate her message."

I'll repeat again:

No that is the whole point, she is not credible, ok I will try to explain it to you in a format that is easy to understand.

1) She says she is a Muslim.
2) She says she is a homosexual.
3) But a homosexual cannot be a Muslim, it is against the Quran.
4) Therefore she is not a Muslim.
5) Therefore she is not credible if she does not know a Muslim cannot be a homosexual, it shows she has very little knowledge of the Quran if she does not know this simple fact.

If she thinks she can be a homosexual AND a Muslim, then she doesn't know the basics of the Quran and she is not a credible source. Now say she didn't claim she is a Muslim, we might care what her argument is, but because she said she is a homosexual Muslim, she lost ALL credibility.

Is being homosexual against the Quran, or only those who engage in same-sex behaviour?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_views_of_homosexuality

Islam presumes that a man will be drawn to beautiful youths, and admonishes the believer not to yield to temptation. Thus, homosexual desire and love are accommodated, but same-sex intercourse is prohibited, as Islam teaches that such intercourse is a violation of the natural boundaries set by Allah. Homosexuality as an attraction is not against the Sharia (which governs the physical actions, not the inner thoughts and feelings), it is only the physical action of same-sex intercourse that is punishable under the Sharia.

...

Off course it's the same-sex intercourse we're talking about, that is the point.

 

[Ozoned]

"Sultan: I calmly tried to explain to him that adultery/fornication is the second biggest sin in Islam (and not Murder as Aimster said) and the punishment for the above is stoning to death (or capital punishment if you like) / 100 whips. I also tried to explain to him that if my children were found guilty of either of the previous sins, I will have no problem carrying out the punishment."

Murder, adultry/ fornification and I suppose the other big ones are punishable sins that can be committed by a Muslim, but you can't even be a muslim if you are a homosexual? And If you aren't a muslim, you must convert or die.. (or pay a tax) :roll:

I have been paying attention. Did I get it all about right?

 

[0marTheZealot]

Originally posted by: Ozoned
"Sultan: I calmly tried to explain to him that adultery/fornication is the second biggest sin in Islam (and not Murder as Aimster said) and the punishment for the above is stoning to death (or capital punishment if you like) / 100 whips. I also tried to explain to him that if my children were found guilty of either of the previous sins, I will have no problem carrying out the punishment."

Murder, adultry/ fornification and I suppose the other big ones are punishable sins that can be committed by a Muslim, but you can't even be a muslim if you are a homosexual? And If you aren't a muslim, you must convert or die.. (or pay a tax) :roll:

I have been paying attention. Did I get it all about right?

The Jizyah is simply a tax that everyone has to pay unless they are Muslim. Zakat covers the Jizyah. It is a means to provide funds for state coffers.

It isn't as simple as covert or die. Islam has a history of providing protection for People of the Book. When Europe was busy killing each other over translation of the Bibles, peoples in the Islamic lands were free to practice whatever sects of Christianity/Judaism they pleased. It is only in the Modern Era that such inter-faith fighting has been so widespread.

As it was said eariler, one can be homosexual, but the act of homosexuality is forbidden. There is nothing wrong with a homosexual identity.

 

[RabidMongoose]

The Jizyah is simply a tax that everyone has to pay unless they are Muslim. Zakat covers the Jizyah. It is a means to provide funds for state coffers.

How nice and discriminatory!

It isn't as simple as covert or die. Islam has a history of providing protection for People of the Book.

Not that I'm disagreeing with this, but what about non 'people of the book'?

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Ozoned
"Sultan: I calmly tried to explain to him that adultery/fornication is the second biggest sin in Islam (and not Murder as Aimster said) and the punishment for the above is stoning to death (or capital punishment if you like) / 100 whips. I also tried to explain to him that if my children were found guilty of either of the previous sins, I will have no problem carrying out the punishment."

Murder, adultry/ fornification and I suppose the other big ones are punishable sins that can be committed by a Muslim, but you can't even be a muslim if you are a homosexual? And If you aren't a muslim, you must convert or die.. (or pay a tax) :roll:

I have been paying attention. Did I get it all about right?

Yeah, I think that about covers that guy. There's also that other lunatic that wants throw homosexuals off a cliff and kill all atheists.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: 0marTheZealot
As it was said eariler, one can be homosexual, but the act of homosexuality is forbidden. There is nothing wrong with a homosexual identity.

Thanks for the answer. That's the impression I got as well.

 

[OCNewbie]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: magomago
I wrote a realllly long and elaborate reply...but it had a censored word, and then i couldn't get it back...grr

maybe another time

Always write long posts in Word or another text editor. Saves you from the dreaded censored problem, the dreaded post got deleted problem (a windows key combination can do it), and the dreaded incorrectly spelled word problem.

Very good suggestion =)

 

[Cerb]

72 cards, 72 names, 72 demons, 72 virgins, and now 72 raisins?
Interesting number, is it not?

 

[0marTheZealot]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

The Jizyah is simply a tax that everyone has to pay unless they are Muslim. Zakat covers the Jizyah. It is a means to provide funds for state coffers.

How nice and discriminatory!

I don't understand how it is discriminatory. Everyone has to pay taxes. Muslims have their tax built as a pillar of faith. Other religions do not have this, so they pay a tax to compensate. It's a method for the state to make money.

It isn't as simple as covert or die. Islam has a history of providing protection for People of the Book.

Not that I'm disagreeing with this, but what about non 'people of the book'?
[/quote]

Not completely sure, but polytheism is strictly forbidden.

 

[RabidMongoose]

I don't understand how it is discriminatory. Everyone has to pay taxes. Muslims have their tax built as a pillar of faith. Other religions do not have this, so they pay a tax to compensate. It's a method for the state to make money.

Having two separate taxes - one meant as charity for Muslims and then one for 'non-Muslims' is simply discriminatory.

 

[arsbanned]

I thought it was 72 Virginians. 72 really pissed off Virginians. 😛