• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Kansas governor signs bill banning Islamic law

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,520
0
0
I mostly agree. I think it is obvious the founding fathers used Christianity as a moral guide - since most of them were Christians and they were creating a set of rules for a mostly Christian nation and were basing those rules off of the rules of England which also was a mostly Christian nation. They definately did not create a theocracy, or ever intend to create one.
Agreed. If nothing else, people who intend to create a theocracy seem unlikely to list "freedom of religion" as the very first amendment in their bill of rights.
Islam is really not much different from other religions in the regard to allowing them. Polytheists are on the "kill on sight" list, as are atheists. Jews and Christians are allowed provided they do not mind being second class citizens and pay a special "you are not a Muslim so suck it up" tax. Not saying other religions are better, simply saying Islam is not better.
I had heard that Islam makes specific allowances for people to practice religions other than Islam, and that, however restricted, is more than can be said for most other religions. I'm not an expert on Islam though, so that interpretation could be wrong...and even if it wasn't, it's hardly the ideal version of freedom of religion. And in any case, may modern Islamic countries are hardly sterling examples of that religious freedom.

Eastern religions seem to fare better for some reason, but I'd overall agree that the three major Western religions aren't really ideal examples of freedom of religion.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
Most eastern religions are actually just philosophies - or at least have no gods in them, so no rules from said gods. That makes a big difference.

I do not begrudge anyone for strictly following their religion. If you honestly believe your god exists then you MUST follow the commands of your god. I may not agree with you, but at least I will know you are being honest.

Islam does allow Christians and Jews to follow their own religions in theory. Like you said, modern Islam does not. In the older days, Islam did and Jews were pretty safe in the Islamic nations. They were still taxed horribly and were treated as second class citizens, but they were not harmed. The RaMBaM (Maimodines) lived his entire life in Islamic controlled lands and was highly respected by the Muslims in many a royal court.

If only Islam were to return to its enlightened roots, it would be a far far better religion. It would be one people would want to join, not one people fear and want to see destroyed.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,520
0
0
Most eastern religions are actually just philosophies - or at least have no gods in them, so no rules from said gods. That makes a big difference.
I agree with that difference, and a much better approach in my opinion. We'd be much better off with something like Buddhism than either Christianity OR Islam, IMO. But to each their own...
I do not begrudge anyone for strictly following their religion. If you honestly believe your god exists then you MUST follow the commands of your god. I may not agree with you, but at least I will know you are being honest.

Islam does allow Christians and Jews to follow their own religions in theory. Like you said, modern Islam does not. In the older days, Islam did and Jews were pretty safe in the Islamic nations. They were still taxed horribly and were treated as second class citizens, but they were not harmed. The RaMBaM (Maimodines) lived his entire life in Islamic controlled lands and was highly respected by the Muslims in many a royal court.

If only Islam were to return to its enlightened roots, it would be a far far better religion. It would be one people would want to join, not one people fear and want to see destroyed.
I honestly don't think the problem is Islam so much as it's embracing a strict, conservative (not politically conservative, no offense meant to the right) theocratic society, whatever the religion it's based on. The Christian part of the world was quite horrible when we let the church run everything, worse than the Islamic part of the world at the time.

The success of the Christian part of the world in modern times is, IMO, due in no small part to moving beyond religion as a major force in society as a whole. The problem with some parts of the Islamic world isn't that they have Islam as their belief system instead of Christianity, it's that they haven't managed to move past having the religion run everything, so they're still somewhat stuck in their own dark ages.

I'm not sure if this is what you are saying, but I'd say Muslims in some parts of the world would certainly do well to embrace more enlightened religious views. Not because there is anything wrong with Islam, but because there is something wrong with RELIGION as a fundamental authority for a civilized society. Or in other words, the problem with Islamic fanatics isn't the Islam part, it's the fanatic part.
 

IGBT

Lifer
Jul 16, 2001
17,699
47
91
Qur'an:9:5 "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war."
 

Orignal Earl

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2005
8,059
55
86
Qur'an:9:5 "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war."
Book of Joshua:
"24 When Israel had finished killing all the men of Ai in the fields and in the wilderness where they had chased them, and when every one of them had been put to the sword, all the Israelites returned to Ai and killed those who were in it. 25 Twelve thousand men and women fell that day—all the people of Ai. "
"29 Then Joshua and all Israel with him moved on from Makkedah to Libnah and attacked it. 30 The Lord also gave that city and its king into Israel’s hand. The city and everyone in it Joshua put to the sword. He left no survivors there."
"32 The Lord gave Lachish into Israel’s hands, and Joshua took it on the second day. The city and everyone in it he put to the sword, just as he had done to Libnah. "
"34 Then Joshua and all Israel with him moved on from Lachish to Eglon; they took up positions against it and attacked it. 35 They captured it that same day and put it to the sword and totally destroyed everyone in it, just as they had done to Lachish."
"36 Then Joshua and all Israel with him went up from Eglon to Hebron and attacked it. 37 They took the city and put it to the sword, together with its king, its villages and everyone in it. They left no survivors. Just as at Eglon, they totally destroyed it and everyone in it."
"38 Then Joshua and all Israel with him turned around and attacked Debir. 39 They took the city, its king and its villages, and put them to the sword. Everyone in it they totally destroyed. They left no survivors. They did to Debir and its king as they had done to Libnah and its king and to Hebron. "
"21 At that time Joshua went and destroyed the Anakites from the hill country: from Hebron, Debir and Anab, from all the hill country of Judah, and from all the hill country of Israel. Joshua totally destroyed them and their towns. 22 No Anakites were left in Israelite territory; only in Gaza, Gath and Ashdod did any survive."

Hitler was just a failed Joshua...

You can't look at SA, one of the US best friends in the region and judge Islam on it.
Why don't people look at one of Israel's best friends in the region (Azerbaijan) and use it to judge Islam?
Right now its just more convenient to judge Islam as evil while your killing thousands of them
 

Orignal Earl

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2005
8,059
55
86
a777pilot-

If followers of Islam have no place in the UN
How can you vote for a Mormon as the President of the US?
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,880
4,211
126
Eastern religions seem to fare better for some reason, but I'd overall agree that the three major Western religions aren't really ideal examples of freedom of religion.
It's a matter of how things are intended vs how they're practiced. Christianity is inherently a matter of choice. A sort of spiritual contract exist between creator and created. Forcing conversion is an oxymoron because it renders it invalid. It's along the line of how legal contracts are considered. One made under duress is invalidated. That doesn't mean that forced conversions didn't happen as it most certainly did. Convert or die did exist, but that was something those in power insisted on no matter how fundamentally opposed it was to Christianity as found in the New Testament. Accountability is left to god, not to men. Unfortunately Islam is practiced much like Spanish Inquisition Catholicism in parts of the world. My definition of freedom is the ability to make choices for oneself and if as a people the ME nations want a theocracy so be it. That does not mean that the right of self determination to follow a religion or not by the individual is invalidated. One may seek converts but not by force, nor should those who are not of a particular faith be punished for its peaceful observance.
 

Orignal Earl

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2005
8,059
55
86
Can someone please show me where these 2.1 billion Muslims are giving people the choice to convert or die?
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
I agree with that difference, and a much better approach in my opinion. We'd be much better off with something like Buddhism than either Christianity OR Islam, IMO. But to each their own...
Only if none of the gods of the religions are real. If one of them is real, we would all be better off following said god's rules. :)


I honestly don't think the problem is Islam so much as it's embracing a strict, conservative (not politically conservative, no offense meant to the right) theocratic society, whatever the religion it's based on. The Christian part of the world was quite horrible when we let the church run everything, worse than the Islamic part of the world at the time.

The success of the Christian part of the world in modern times is, IMO, due in no small part to moving beyond religion as a major force in society as a whole. The problem with some parts of the Islamic world isn't that they have Islam as their belief system instead of Christianity, it's that they haven't managed to move past having the religion run everything, so they're still somewhat stuck in their own dark ages.

I'm not sure if this is what you are saying, but I'd say Muslims in some parts of the world would certainly do well to embrace more enlightened religious views. Not because there is anything wrong with Islam, but because there is something wrong with RELIGION as a fundamental authority for a civilized society. Or in other words, the problem with Islamic fanatics isn't the Islam part, it's the fanatic part.
The big difference between Islam and Christianity is that Jesus said not to seek worldly power (not in those exact terms, but that was the gist of what He said) but Islam says to seek worldly power. An Islamic Theocracy is actually following their holy book, but a Christian Theocracy is violating it. The only Christian who is allowed to run a Theocracy is The Messiah when he sets it up in the end times.

Basically, for Islam to move forward it must move backward. It must return to following the rules of Islam in the Quran - which is to not slaughter people who only want peace with you.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
Can someone please show me where these 2.1 billion Muslims are giving people the choice to convert or die?
Not sure what you are asking. As long as the person is part of "The People of the Book - aka Christians and Jews", they do not have to convert. Polytheists and Atheists are to either become Muslims or die, according to the Quran.

Witchcraft is part of polytheism and carries the death penalty in Saudi Arabia:

Saudi Arabia takes witchcraft so seriously that it has banned the Harry Potter series by British writer J.K. Rowling, rife with tales of sorcery and magic. It set up the Anti-Witchcraft Unit in May 2009 and placed it under the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (CPV), Saudi Arabia's religious police.
"In accordance with our Islamic tradition we believe that magic really exists," Abdullah Jaber, a political cartoonist at the Saudi daily Al-Jazirah, told The Media Line. "The fact that an official body, subordinate to the Saudi Ministry of Interior, has a unit to combat sorcery proves that the government recognizes this, like Muslims worldwide."

The last time Saudi Arabia executed a convicted sorcerer was in late 2007, but this did not indicate the penalty has since been lifted, Cristoph Wilcke, a senior Middle East Researcher at Human Rights Watch and expert on Saudi Arabia, told The Media Line.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2751683/posts

Atheists are treated the same - it is illegal to deny the existance of Allah. It is also the death penalty to convert away from Islam.
 

Orignal Earl

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2005
8,059
55
86
Witchcraft is part of polytheism and carries the death penalty in Saudi Arabia:
And here we go again, pointing to SA
I guess the US also supports this since they sell the Royal dictator all his weapons and fighter jets to kill off these witches
Tell us the story of who the King is and how his form of Islam got started
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
And here we go again, pointing to SA
You asked a question, I gave you an answer. If you did not want the answer, why did you ask the question? The post was simply informative, nothing else implied. Everything I intended to say was directly said.
 

a777pilot

Diamond Member
Apr 26, 2011
4,261
21
81
Can you be more specific? Are you talking about Middle Eastern Muslims or Kansans?

I said muslims. Did I stutter?

The so called religion of islam is more in need of a reformation than any religion in the history of religions.
 

Orignal Earl

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2005
8,059
55
86
You asked a question, I gave you an answer. If you did not want the answer, why did you ask the question? The post was simply informative, nothing else implied. Everything I intended to say was directly said.
Ya, ok
SA is Representative of Islam as the Rev Phelps is of Christians
But you know that
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY