Question for Muslims...

[Kadarin]

My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

 

[imported_Condor]

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

Once they have eliminated all states and the world is ruled by Islamic law and Mullahs, it won't really matter, will it?

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Condor

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

Once they have eliminated all states and the world is ruled by Islamic law and Mullahs, it won't really matter, will it?

Ok, seriously, you sound like you're planning on blowing up your local Mosque...should I keep my eye on the news?

 

[mOeeOm]

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

Well, laws are based on religion, especially the 10 commandments, and the Christian/Muslim/Jewish laws are the same. If we are talking about just laws, then yes I am bound by Islamic law, there is really no conflict between islamic law and the laws of a country, whatever is considered a crime is the same, but what is different is the punishment. The laws of the state are the same as the laws of Islam in its basic form, such as murder, stealing, rape etc etc etc.

The law is not an issue, what people can do or not do is the issue. The law of Islam is that you cannot spread lies about Islam, if you do it is punishable by death, such as the case of Theo Van Gogh. Criticizing is fine, spreading lies is another thing. In this case, then I believe Islamic law takes first priority in order to stop the lies from spreading further.

 

[mOeeOm]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Condor

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

Once they have eliminated all states and the world is ruled by Islamic law and Mullahs, it won't really matter, will it?

Ok, seriously, you sound like you're planning on blowing up your local Mosque...should I keep my eye on the news?

No no he has this image that Muslims are out for world domination....

 

[dahunan]

I would like to see research done (somehow impartially) that ranks religions by who has the most homocidal extremists who use their religion to support their murderous belief system

 

[mOeeOm]

Originally posted by: dahunan
I would like to see research done (somehow impartially) that ranks religions by who has the most homocidal extremists who use their religion to support their murderous belief system

I'd also like to see that.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: Condor

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

Once they have eliminated all states and the world is ruled by Islamic law and Mullahs, it won't really matter, will it?

Every Muslim country has laws based on Islamic Laws. Are you suggesting every Muslim nation is "evil"?

 

[bdude]

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

Well, laws are based on religion, especially the 10 commandments, and the Christian/Muslim/Jewish laws are the same. If we are talking about just laws, then yes I am bound by Islamic law, there is really no conflict between islamic law and the laws of a country, whatever is considered a crime is the same, but what is different is the punishment. The laws of the state are the same as the laws of Islam in its basic form, such as murder, stealing, rape etc etc etc.

The law is not an issue, what people can do or not do is the issue. The law of Islam is that you cannot spread lies about Islam, if you do it is punishable by death, such as the case of Theo Van Gogh. Criticizing is fine, spreading lies is another thing. In this case, then I believe Islamic law takes first priority in order to stop the lies from spreading further.

Law in modern day society is (generally) not based on religion.

Theo Van Gogh was not a muslim. Therefore he was not bound by Islamic law.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Condor

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

Once they have eliminated all states and the world is ruled by Islamic law and Mullahs, it won't really matter, will it?

Every Muslim country has laws based on Islamic Laws. Are you suggesting every Muslim nation is "evil"?

Isn't the new Iraqi government planning on having some component of Islamic law as well? Don't tell me were going to have to invade AGAIN. Three times is not, in fact, the charm.

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

Well, laws are based on religion, especially the 10 commandments, and the Christian/Muslim/Jewish laws are the same. If we are talking about just laws, then yes I am bound by Islamic law, there is really no conflict between islamic law and the laws of a country, whatever is considered a crime is the same, but what is different is the punishment. The laws of the state are the same as the laws of Islam in its basic form, such as murder, stealing, rape etc etc etc.

The law is not an issue, what people can do or not do is the issue. The law of Islam is that you cannot spread lies about Islam, if you do it is punishable by death, such as the case of Theo Van Gogh. Criticizing is fine, spreading lies is another thing. In this case, then I believe Islamic law takes first priority in order to stop the lies from spreading further.

You are wrong...we have to respect the laws of the other country so as long as it does not restrict our ability to practice our religion.

What someone else does or says might not be what we want, and may be a violation of our laws (depicting prophet Mohammed for one) but it does not inhibit our ability to practice our religion. They can draw the Prophet as much as they want, and I will be angry and concerned with that, but I am not being forced to accept these pictures. And under their law, they have a right to do so. However under their law as well, I have a right to protest and make a clamor.

Under our law as well, if I go and kill a person who does that, there is a real possibility I will face the death penalty myself. Either way, we should respect the laws of the "Non Muslim" country we live in, because it is that country that is letting me live on the land, etc.

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

Well, laws are based on religion, especially the 10 commandments, and the Christian/Muslim/Jewish laws are the same. If we are talking about just laws, then yes I am bound by Islamic law, there is really no conflict between islamic law and the laws of a country, whatever is considered a crime is the same, but what is different is the punishment. The laws of the state are the same as the laws of Islam in its basic form, such as murder, stealing, rape etc etc etc.

The law is not an issue, what people can do or not do is the issue. The law of Islam is that you cannot spread lies about Islam, if you do it is punishable by death, such as the case of Theo Van Gogh. Criticizing is fine, spreading lies is another thing. In this case, then I believe Islamic law takes first priority in order to stop the lies from spreading further.

Yes, you see so much constructive criticism in the arab world these days:roll:

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: bdude

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

Well, laws are based on religion, especially the 10 commandments, and the Christian/Muslim/Jewish laws are the same. If we are talking about just laws, then yes I am bound by Islamic law, there is really no conflict between islamic law and the laws of a country, whatever is considered a crime is the same, but what is different is the punishment. The laws of the state are the same as the laws of Islam in its basic form, such as murder, stealing, rape etc etc etc.

The law is not an issue, what people can do or not do is the issue. The law of Islam is that you cannot spread lies about Islam, if you do it is punishable by death, such as the case of Theo Van Gogh. Criticizing is fine, spreading lies is another thing. In this case, then I believe Islamic law takes first priority in order to stop the lies from spreading further.

Law in modern day society is (generally) not based on religion.

Theo Van Gogh was not a muslim. Therefore he was not bound by Islamic law.

We will either convert you or kill you... said the present day follower of which religion

 

[mOeeOm]

Originally posted by: bdude

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

Well, laws are based on religion, especially the 10 commandments, and the Christian/Muslim/Jewish laws are the same. If we are talking about just laws, then yes I am bound by Islamic law, there is really no conflict between islamic law and the laws of a country, whatever is considered a crime is the same, but what is different is the punishment. The laws of the state are the same as the laws of Islam in its basic form, such as murder, stealing, rape etc etc etc.

The law is not an issue, what people can do or not do is the issue. The law of Islam is that you cannot spread lies about Islam, if you do it is punishable by death, such as the case of Theo Van Gogh. Criticizing is fine, spreading lies is another thing. In this case, then I believe Islamic law takes first priority in order to stop the lies from spreading further.

Law in modern day society is (generally) not based on religion.

Theo Van Gogh was not a muslim. Therefore he was not bound by Islamic law.

Everyone is bound by Islamic law when it comes to something like this.

 

[bdude]

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: bdude

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

Well, laws are based on religion, especially the 10 commandments, and the Christian/Muslim/Jewish laws are the same. If we are talking about just laws, then yes I am bound by Islamic law, there is really no conflict between islamic law and the laws of a country, whatever is considered a crime is the same, but what is different is the punishment. The laws of the state are the same as the laws of Islam in its basic form, such as murder, stealing, rape etc etc etc.

The law is not an issue, what people can do or not do is the issue. The law of Islam is that you cannot spread lies about Islam, if you do it is punishable by death, such as the case of Theo Van Gogh. Criticizing is fine, spreading lies is another thing. In this case, then I believe Islamic law takes first priority in order to stop the lies from spreading further.

Law in modern day society is (generally) not based on religion.

Theo Van Gogh was not a muslim. Therefore he was not bound by Islamic law.

Everyone is bound by Islamic law when it comes to something like this.

You and what terrorist army will gonna stop me?

or to rephrase: who will stop me or anyone (non muslims) from breaking islamic law?

 

[dahunan]

Your religious laws ONLY apply to believers of your religion...

I hope your God tears you limb from limb if you ever "PUNISH" a non-muslim for crimes that YOUR RELIGIOUS belief system claims offended it.

 

[Aimster]

Theo Van Gogh
was killed by an idiot

had nothing to do with Islam.

Just like if I wrote a book talking so much smack about Christianity .. I'm sure some psycho will come after me. I sure hope it isnt that woman from that show on Fox where they switched wives... ahhhh

 

[mOeeOm]

Originally posted by: magomago

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

Well, laws are based on religion, especially the 10 commandments, and the Christian/Muslim/Jewish laws are the same. If we are talking about just laws, then yes I am bound by Islamic law, there is really no conflict between islamic law and the laws of a country, whatever is considered a crime is the same, but what is different is the punishment. The laws of the state are the same as the laws of Islam in its basic form, such as murder, stealing, rape etc etc etc.

The law is not an issue, what people can do or not do is the issue. The law of Islam is that you cannot spread lies about Islam, if you do it is punishable by death, such as the case of Theo Van Gogh. Criticizing is fine, spreading lies is another thing. In this case, then I believe Islamic law takes first priority in order to stop the lies from spreading further.

You are wrong...we have to respect the laws of the other country so as long as it does not restrict our ability to practice our religion.

What someone else does or says might not be what we want, and may be a violation of our laws (depicting prophet Mohammed for one) but it does not inhibit our ability to practice our religion. They can draw the Prophet as much as they want, and I will be angry and concerned with that, but I am not being forced to accept these pictures. And under their law, they have a right to do so. However under their law as well, I have a right to protest and make a clamor.

Under our law as well, if I go and kill a person who does that, there is a real possibility I will face the death penalty myself. Either way, we should respect the laws of the "Non Muslim" country we live in, because it is that country that is letting me live on the land, etc.

You sound like a Muslim....if not, sorry, but if so, then...what are you doing? You MUST follow the Quran to the letter. We are commanded by God to punish those who spread lies about Islam, you can't pick and choose what you wanna follow, regardless of the time or place you live in. And yes before you kill them, you have to be just in it,

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: dahunan
I would like to see research done (somehow impartially) that ranks religions by who has the most homocidal extremists who use their religion to support their murderous belief system

I'd also like to see that.

Can you think of some outside of Islam ... and I don't mean Governments that you want to claim represent a religion.. I mean true nutcases like bin laden and the whackos in Indonesia etc..

 

[raildogg]

Does Osama also say that everyone is bound by muslim law? I'm sure he does.

And you are one of his disciples.

 

[bdude]

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: magomago

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

Well, laws are based on religion, especially the 10 commandments, and the Christian/Muslim/Jewish laws are the same. If we are talking about just laws, then yes I am bound by Islamic law, there is really no conflict between islamic law and the laws of a country, whatever is considered a crime is the same, but what is different is the punishment. The laws of the state are the same as the laws of Islam in its basic form, such as murder, stealing, rape etc etc etc.

The law is not an issue, what people can do or not do is the issue. The law of Islam is that you cannot spread lies about Islam, if you do it is punishable by death, such as the case of Theo Van Gogh. Criticizing is fine, spreading lies is another thing. In this case, then I believe Islamic law takes first priority in order to stop the lies from spreading further.

You are wrong...we have to respect the laws of the other country so as long as it does not restrict our ability to practice our religion.

What someone else does or says might not be what we want, and may be a violation of our laws (depicting prophet Mohammed for one) but it does not inhibit our ability to practice our religion. They can draw the Prophet as much as they want, and I will be angry and concerned with that, but I am not being forced to accept these pictures. And under their law, they have a right to do so. However under their law as well, I have a right to protest and make a clamor.

Under our law as well, if I go and kill a person who does that, there is a real possibility I will face the death penalty myself. Either way, we should respect the laws of the "Non Muslim" country we live in, because it is that country that is letting me live on the land, etc.

You sound like a Muslim....if not, sorry, but if so, then...what are you doing? You MUST follow the Quran to the letter. We are commanded by God to punish those who spread lies about Islam, you can't pick and choose what you wanna follow, regardless of the time or place you live in. And yes before you kill them, you have to be just in it,

Does anyone else feel like they're being duped by this guy? Can't be for real.

 

[mOeeOm]

Originally posted by: bdude

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: bdude

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

Well, laws are based on religion, especially the 10 commandments, and the Christian/Muslim/Jewish laws are the same. If we are talking about just laws, then yes I am bound by Islamic law, there is really no conflict between islamic law and the laws of a country, whatever is considered a crime is the same, but what is different is the punishment. The laws of the state are the same as the laws of Islam in its basic form, such as murder, stealing, rape etc etc etc.

The law is not an issue, what people can do or not do is the issue. The law of Islam is that you cannot spread lies about Islam, if you do it is punishable by death, such as the case of Theo Van Gogh. Criticizing is fine, spreading lies is another thing. In this case, then I believe Islamic law takes first priority in order to stop the lies from spreading further.

Law in modern day society is (generally) not based on religion.

Theo Van Gogh was not a muslim. Therefore he was not bound by Islamic law.

Everyone is bound by Islamic law when it comes to something like this.

You and what terrorist army will gonna stop me?

or to rephrase: who will stop me or anyone (non muslims) from breaking islamic law?

Clearly Theo shared your attitude right?

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: dahunan

We will either convert you or kill you... said the present day follower of which religion

Probably someone from every religion, right?

 

[mOeeOm]

Originally posted by: dahunan
Your religious laws ONLY apply to believers of your religion...

I hope your God tears you limb from limb if you ever "PUNISH" a non-muslim for crimes that YOUR RELIGIOUS belief system claims offended it.

Nope, affects ALL. Hmmm...a terrible thing to hope, but don't worry it won't ever happen.

 

[bdude]

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: bdude

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: bdude

Originally posted by: mOeeOm

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
My question is inspired by events such as the French riots, the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the thread on this page regarding the cartoon that depicted Islam in a negative light:

Are you first and foremost a Muslim, or are you first and foremost a citizen of the country in which you live and have citizenship? If you consider yourself first and foremost a Muslim, are you bound by Islamic law? If so what do you adhere to if there is a conflict between Islamic law and the laws of the country in which you reside?

If you feel Islamic law takes precedence when there is a conflict, to where adhering to Islamic law means that you are breaking the laws of the state, why do you feel like you are entitled to continue being a member of the state?

In my opinion, were you to do something like kill Theo van Gogh because he did something offensive to Islam, something which might be perfectly in order with Islamic law, you would no longer be entitled to the protections of the state in which you live, and should be removed from the state, be it by incarceration, execution, or deportation.

Well, laws are based on religion, especially the 10 commandments, and the Christian/Muslim/Jewish laws are the same. If we are talking about just laws, then yes I am bound by Islamic law, there is really no conflict between islamic law and the laws of a country, whatever is considered a crime is the same, but what is different is the punishment. The laws of the state are the same as the laws of Islam in its basic form, such as murder, stealing, rape etc etc etc.

The law is not an issue, what people can do or not do is the issue. The law of Islam is that you cannot spread lies about Islam, if you do it is punishable by death, such as the case of Theo Van Gogh. Criticizing is fine, spreading lies is another thing. In this case, then I believe Islamic law takes first priority in order to stop the lies from spreading further.

Law in modern day society is (generally) not based on religion.

Theo Van Gogh was not a muslim. Therefore he was not bound by Islamic law.

Everyone is bound by Islamic law when it comes to something like this.

You and what terrorist army will gonna stop me?

or to rephrase: who will stop me or anyone (non muslims) from breaking islamic law?

Clearly Theo shared your attitude right?

Fortunately he ain't the only one who's smearing islam.

:evil: