Finally speaking out
Dallas imam speaks out
About time.
There is also nothing in there about blowing people up,but that happens as well.
It's about time someone stepped up and said killing women is wrong. Now how about talking about the load of crap that blowing people up is. There is nowhere in the Koran that is states that these things are ok and will get you to paradise.
IRVING – The leader of an Irving mosque denounced honor killings Friday, saying they have no place in Islam.
About time.
Muslim experts say that there's no sanction for honor killings from the Quran, the holy book of Islam, or from Islamic law.
There is also nothing in there about blowing people up,but that happens as well.
Still, honor killings do happen, observers say. They are more common in Muslim-majority countries, despite Islamic leaders' condemnation of the practice, according to a United Nations Population Fund report from 2000.
The report found that "perhaps 5,000 women and girls a year" are killed by their own families.
It's about time someone stepped up and said killing women is wrong. Now how about talking about the load of crap that blowing people up is. There is nowhere in the Koran that is states that these things are ok and will get you to paradise.
posted by davis14633 at 05:45
14 Comments:
Soo...I wonder how long before this Imam in Irving ends up dead for having spoken out.
It is not as though Christianity is the religion of Sweetness and Light and does not pick and choose to follow the rules as each Christian religion sees fit.
Deut 25:11-12 - A woman's hand must be cut off should she touch the genitals of a man other than her husband's.
Leviticus 20:13 & Romans 1 27-32 - Put to death homosexuals.
Leviticus 21:16-23 - No one who is handicapped may be close to the alter of God.
Leviticus 24:14-23 - Anyone who blasphemes or curses shall be stoned to death by the entire community.
Numbers 15:32-36 - Violate the Sabbath and the penalty is death by stoning.
2-Chronicles 15:13 - "That anyone should not search for Jehovah thy God should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman."
Deut 13:6-10 - If your spouse, sibling or anyone entices you toward a new religion, you must kill him/her without fail.
Deut 17:2-7 - Kill everyone with a religious view different from yours.
Duet 22:23-24 - Kill rape victims if they fail to cry out loud enough.
Psalms 58:1-11 - The righteous get to wash their feet in the blood of the non-religious.
I could go on and on with scripture from the Old Testament but I will move on to the New Testament, which is suppose to represent the kinder gentler side of Christianity.
Matthew 5:6-7 - Jesus says to pray in private not public. Soooo, what is with all the Christian whoohaa in schools, public meetings and the like?
Matthew 5:17-19 - Jesus approves of the law aka Old Testament.
Matthew 15:4 - Jesus tells the Pharisees that "For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death."
Luke 14:26 - Jesus speaking: "If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple."
Luke 16:18 - Jesus: "Everyone that divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he that marries a woman divorced from a husband commits adultery."
Luke 19:29-34 - Jesus has two disciples steal a colt for him to ride into Jerusalem. Soooo, Jesus would be fine riding around in a stolen car?
John 8:44 - Jesus calls the Jews the "sons of the Devil".
Romans 8:29-30 - Everyone is pre-ordained to their destination, whether it be saved or damned. Nothing they can do about their destiny.
I Corinthians 7:1-4 - The husband exercises control over his wife's body.
1 Peter 3:1 - Wives must be in subjection to their husbands.
Ephesians 6:5-9 - "Slaves be obedient to your masters." Slavery is sooooo, okay in The Holy Bible.
Timothy 2:11-14 - Jehovah does not permit a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man.
I Peter 2:13-14 - Subject yourselves to a king or a governor, as they are superior.
Rev 9:1-6 - Just for not believing, torture by demonic locusts. Does not matter if you have been good all your life, you will wish for death just because you did not believe in thy God.
Whether it be the "Torah", "Talmud", "Holy Bible", "Qur'an", "Book of Mormon", "Dianetics", "Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures", "Tao Te Ching", "The Analects ", "Avesta", "Vedas", "Pali Tripitaka" or "Book of the Dead " it is nothing more than a Big Book of Fables. Perhaps the content of these religious texts are "the inspired word of God" However, every single person/organization/religion who has spread the "word of God" has had and does have an AGENDA. That being the case there is no possible way the "inspired word of God" has not in some manner or another been bastardized by well-meaning and/or self-serving people. Thus, arguing whether one religion is better than another is tantamount to attempting to discern if pig poop smells better than horse poop. To do such a person would have to take the time to sniff the poop.
***************************************
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful." - Seneca the Younger 4 BCE-65 ACE
Ja, and if we could also keep the Marines from raping and killing the Marine women.
Mr/Ms Anonymous. I do not believe in censoring or deleting comments, (unless obviously spam), so I shall leave yours in place. You should consider the meaning behind such action.
Something tells me, however, that you would not choose to be so deliberately inflammatory if facing in person the three Marines who blog here. Hiding behind electronic anonymity is probably the ultimate manifestation of cowardice, so I will simply consign your comment -- and by extension, yourself -- where they both belong. I've already spent far more time on you than you are worth.
This is what happens when child molesters are allowed to access the internet and post anonymously from the State Pen. *shakes head*
Your tax dollars at work folks. :/
Did I just post the term "scum bag" out loud?
My bad!
*BLuSH*
In regard to the above discussion about how Christianity can be viewed as poorly as Islam, I view the old testament as two peas in a pod with the Koran as essentially indicated. However, in reviewing many of the new testament scripture listed, I feel that those have been taken out of context and are not intended to have the meaning they impart when entirely out of context. Just so you know, while I spent the first half of my life going to church and studying the bible, I am in no way a bible thumper and in fact can not be accused of believing in anything. That said, the bible, like any book, has to be read in its entirety and even with the understanding of the time period and culture in which it references, which is one of the difficulties associated with the bible or any ancient text. The sayings, colloquialisms, parables, stories, etc.., that are incorporated are initially assumed by the writer to easily be understood by the reader, but of course are lost with the passage of time as well as through multiple language translations. There is a whole book about understanding those concepts as misrepresented in some cases by the interpreters of the bible from Aramaic to Hebrew to Greek to English, and Jarrhead has it in some box at his house somewhere. Anyway, listing those verses out of context is not a fair representation in most cases as to their meaning. That said, Christianity has certainly had its darker days in history with the Catholics being difficult to distinguish at times from a current day zealous muslim, and I'm pretty sure the Protestants have had their evil days as well, just not as many as the Catholics. I am still of the opinion that the mainstream Christian bible, aka King James and subsequent revisions, and the traditionally accepted teachings of Jesus do not support the terrible things that many of the "Christian" religions have done, while I am of the perception that the Koran does support killing of non-believers. I will not purport to be that knowledgeable regarding the Koran, so that is just a perception from varying conversations with people that indicate they know more than myself. There is little doubt that religion has been used to subjugate and motivate people to bad purpose over the centuries while creating power and wealth for the manipulators of said religions, but there is a sucker born every day and history is both awash with religious based manipulations as well as non-religious ones. Good examples of the non-religious ones include the Nazis and the Marxists and to a lesser degree the Japanese although they viewed the emperor as a god or something like that until he got his ass kicked by a few good men.
Ok, I didn't think this little article would spark such a discussion, but hey.Kinda like it. Now for my 2 cents.
Many horrible things have been done in the name of "God" (used in quotes to denote all supreme deities) Religions mirror the common political and social norms of their times, and when many of them were formed it was a rather violent time. At the height of Roman rule, you could be executed for breaking a deal. Slavery, Gladitorial games, and an almost constant state of war were the norm. Human life was not considered as valuable as we do it today. Not to mention that until Constantine, you could be executed for being a christian. Christianity was literally a secret society and its members had to be protected through ritual and secrecy. Someone leaving or a plant could spell death for everyone. Many of the writtings and rituals are born from these days.
In todays society, Christianity has evolved ( I know, nice choice of words) to a more tolerant practice. Consider that our United States was formed by a group of men who were deeply religious and Judeo christians. Many good things are being done by Christians because of the moral beliefs that are being taught today.
As with anything, there are nut jobs out there that have twisted religion to fit what they want, so they can justify what ever action or atrocity they commit. The difference is that Christians on the whole, condemn and prosecute the sickos who kill in the name of "God". This has not been happening among Muslims. Most of these criminals are being held up as Martyrs and heroes among the Muslim population. This was the first article I have seen of some "leader" in the Muslim community speaking out against these activities.
To Jar(egg)head:
You guys are like a like a pile of gunpowder kegs with a fuse trailing out just begging to be lit off. So I did, and I got the bang response I expected. LoL
My point was that a member of the Marine Corps raped and killed another Marine woman, so shouldn’t we expect Marine Corps General Pace to step out and make a fifteen minute speech denouncing murder and violence against woman. Isn’t he responsible for speaking out and reminding his troops that this is not acceptable behavior, just as the Imams should speak out against the violence of their followers? My answer is that most people already know that the Marine Corps does not stand for this type of conduct in anyway, and thus a statement from Pace is not required. And in the same manner, an automatic response from Muslim Imams condemning the aberrant action of one of its members is also not necessarily warranted. Do I exaggerate to compare one killing in the Marine Corps with many which occur in the Muslim community? Yes, obviously. But then maybe we could all use more frequent admonitions from our priests, mullahs, reverends, etc., and our civil leaders to eschew violence. So I agree with the top posters that the Imams need to speak out, and we could use more similar talk from the Christian pulpits, too. And maybe even Pace ought to say, “Remember guys, nuke the Islamofascists, not the American women”.
-----------------
As for “anonymity”, I don’t see your picture, address and phone number posted here, and even your Blogger profile appears to have gone AWOL at this time. What's up with that?
My profile is linked at the top of the page. My photograph is in it, and has been since I started this site three years ago. As for why my address and phone number aren't in it... look in a mirror.
You came here, by your own confession, to comment under false pretenses and deliberately agitate. You are not welcome here, nor is the apologist sophistry which you are attempting to pass off as logic. Begone.
Sorry for the delay in responding your comments. I actually had to work during business hours as well as spend non-business hours prepping for busy time with the big dogs.
Vizigoth - You are correct in your assertion that most documents and books are best understood when read in their entirety. However, you are mistaken in your assertion that the Holy Bible is such a book. The fact the Holy Bible is a compilation of works by numerous authors that frequently contradict each other indicates that reading the book in its entirety will do very little to enhance the quality of the reader’s understanding. When a person takes an objective approach to the religious texts of the world there is no doubt the most popular of the Big Books of Myths and Fables are for the most part about belittling and demeaning those who do not agree with and adhere to the myths and fables contained within a particular book. In light of the advances of science and law, for the most part, a majority of these books have outlived their usefulness and are indeed a danger to the people of our time. Just a reminder to you. As for your assertion that it was only a few who took scripture out of context to further their cause allow me to remind you that the Catholic Church initiated the Crusades from 1095-1271, numerous ongoing Protestant supported schisms occurred during the years 1378-1648. During the first half of the 20th century in the United States, The Ku Klux Klan used scripture from the Holy Bible as the basis for their hatred and to substantiate their demand that the races be kept separate until U.S. federal laws passed in the mid to late 1960's. Many Christian, in particular, Baptist preachers condoned the actions of the KKK, which included the murder of blacks and persecution of blacks as well as whites who disagreed with the KKK. The Muslims who take out of context and use the text of the Qur'an to justify the atrocities committed against non-Muslims and Muslims who fraternize with and aid non-Muslims is very similar to what the KKK did 40 years ago in the United States. So similar in fact that Osama bin Laden issued a statement that declared: ”Muslims who aid the infidels should be dealt with more harshly than the infidels because these Muslims are traitors to Islam.” The KKK was known for declaring whites who aided blacks as traitors to the white race as well as traitors to Christian faith in an attempt to justify persecuting whites who disagreed with the KKK.
Please understand I do not defend ANY religion. Personally, I believe EVERY religion that has committed MURDER and engaged in persecution in the name of God should forever lose its right to declare itself as a religion of God. Wicca and Scientology have a greater right to claim being representative of God than does Islam and Christianity.
On a side note, you will be interested to know the Catholics are STILL crazy. In July 2007, Pope Benedict XVI again declared the Holy Catholic Apostolic Church as the only true church and that all other Christian churches lacked the means to offer salvation. Please, feel free to read the link.
Incidentally, a Catholic father and a Jewish mother raised me. Subsequently I read and write Latin, which I learned during my many years attending Catholic schools and in preparation of my Holy Confirmation, which followed my First Communion. I also read, write and speak Hebrew, which I learned at Hebrew school in preparation of my Bat Mitzvah.
***************************************************************
davis14633 – The laws set forth by most nations that have elected to be other than theocracies have been most responsible for religion being held in check and the ancient myths and fables contained in religious texts do not take precedent over the rights most nations believe are inherent to their citizens. As for your assertion that the founding father’s were religious; the mere fact they imposed a separation of state and church on the new republic indicates they clearly felt that religion was a choice best left up to an individual and not something to be imposed upon every citizen. Thomas Jefferson made the following recommendation to his nephew Peter Carr in 1787: "Question with boldness even the existence of God; because if there be one, he must more approve the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear." Benjamin Franklin was a known atheist. Several other founding fathers were reluctant to or never did reveal their religious beliefs or lack there of.
I do indeed have tremendous problems with individuals who impose their moral and religious convictions on a society that does not and has never forced its citizens to adhere or respect anyone’s personal religious choices. ALL people within a non-theocratic nation should be required to abide by the law of the land regardless of their religious affiliation. If the United States would remove all religious observation from government than no religion or member of a religion would have the right to demand recognition and/or privilege based upon personal religious convictions. I do indeed believe this was the intent when the founding fathers wrote "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." as the first few words of the First Amendment. Trusting in God is a VASTLY different matter than trusting in Christianity/Islam/Catholicism and the like.
To anonymous 11:05...
Thank you for eradicating any shame or embarrassment I may have felt in publicly posting the term "scum bag."
The lesson you should have learned from your encounter: If you poke a tiger do not be surprised if it growls, bites and slashes at you.
Mzchief..
I will have to beg to differ with you. Seperation of church and state was added to prevent a national religion from being established. Prior to the formation of the United States, Countries had a national religion based off of what religion their fearless leader proclaimed to be the national religion. The Anglican church was founded in England just so Henry the VIII could get a divorce, before that England was Catholic, Ol henry didn't like being told what to do by the Pope. many of the founding fathers had seen what influence a national religion could have on a country, not to mention they were a mixture of Protestant,and Methodists. So to prevent any one religion from become an overwhelming influence, none could.
As to the beliefs of the signers all you have to do is look at the document
"the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them"
" that they are endowed by their Creator "
" And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence,"
mzchief - I don't disagree with your follow-up point in general, but I want to reinforce the point I made in probably an overly verbose way. My point overall was regarding the listed new testament verses and that they specifically were out of context and were never intended to literally mean what they appear to mean. I am very aware that the bible is a composite of many writers, having read a book on the scientific analysis of the composite works with all the overlaps of writers between the various books and supposed independent writers (I can't remember what they call that study or science, but here again Jarhead has that book in some box as well). For instance, the 4 gospels, none of which were actually written by their given namesakes clearly have some of the exact same stories and same writers from one gospel to the next while being mixed in with the writings of different authors. My suspicion is that the majority of bible believers out there do not even understand that the 4 gospels were not written by their namesakes. Anyway, getting verbose again, I agree with overall inconsistencies and errancy (there is whole group in, at a minimum, the Baptist church corner that believe in the errancy of the bible), but I do not feel the verses you quoted accurately reflect their meaning in context. Another issue is that you seem to indicate that I “asserted” that the atrocities committed under the name of the Christian religion were fairly rare and well in the past. I did not assert, infer, or otherwise remotely imply that. Crimes and atrocities in the name of Christian religions still occur daily such as "Christians" blowing up abortion clinics or killing abortion doctors, etc... I merely mentioned what I felt were some of the larger and well known perpetrators. That said, I still contend that in a truly open-minded reading of the generally accepted teachings of Jesus and the traditional King James bible a person cannot find that killing abortion doctors, etc... is something condoned by those teachings. That's just my opinion and perception, and I certainly understand that given the 1000's of different interpretations of the very same words and book that people have and will see meanings differently, but that is where I believe the objective and open-minded reading of the text makes the difference as well as stepping back and simply taking a strategic look at what Jesus supposedly taught and what he did and didn't do, as recorded. As far as my books that Jarhead has, I am still holding his little book on Bhuda (whatever the spelling) hostage as well as his book on modern fighter - dog fighting geometries (can’t remember the name of that book, but it has been well taken care of).
Post a Comment
<< Home