• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cain: Tenn. Mosque Infringes on Religious Freedom

http://www.debatepolitics.com/religion-and-philosophy/105143-cult-islam-3.html#post1059687579
NGNM85 said:
There is no reading of scrupture that will possibly lead one to any other conclusion. That's an honest appraisal.
There is no open-ended command in the Bible to kill those who do not believe, i.e. for simply a non-believer. But, islam does.
Qur'an:9:29 "Fight those who do not believe until they all surrender, paying the protective tax in submission."

Qur'an:9:112 "The Believers fight in Allah's Cause, they slay and are slain, kill and are killed."

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."

Ishaq:325 "Muslims, fight in Allah's Cause. Stand firm and you will prosper. Help the Prophet, obey him, give him your allegiance, and your religion will be victorious."

Qur'an:8:39 "Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah."

Qur'an:8:39 "So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world)."​
The most important thing is that in islam muslims believe that the quran is the direct words of allah and the commands of allah are binding for all times. Also, they are to emulate their prophet in deeds and sayings according to Sunnah.

If only that were the case. Sorry, there's quite a bit more to it than that.
That's the main core of Christianity.

He also had some dark days where he said things like; 'But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.' (Luke 19:27)
Do you know what a parable is? A parable is a graphic lesson using common imagery or theme people can understand to illustrate a moral or spiritual lesson. In this parable Jesus was using an actual historical event that happened just before Jesus' birth but was common knowledge and experience to many Jews alive at that time.

This parable was based on the historical event concerning Herod's son Herod Archelaus. In order to legitimize his rulership as Tetrarchy of Judea against his brother's claim, he set out to Rome, a far away place, to submit his claim to Caesar Augusta. Before his journey he slaughtered 3000 Pharisees for sedition. In Rome he was opposed by his brother, Antipas, and many Jews for his violence.

If you read the whole chapter from the beginning, you will know why this parable was given, as in verse 11:

"As they heard these things, he proceeded to tell a parable, because he was near to Jerusalem, and because they supposed that the kingdom of God was to appear immediately. "

The people were expecting the Kingdom of God to appear and the parable was about the kingdom of God. We know the Kingdom of God has not happened even to this day but until the second return of Christ when he will return to judge the world. When that day comes, evil persons who want to continue with their evil ways and do not want Jesus to rule over them will not be allowed to go on with their wicked ways. You either behave or you are gone. No more goodies for bad behavior like they have been getting away for so long.

If you have problems with a Judge getting rid for good of evil people such as those islamic terrorists who kidnapped, raped, terrorized and caused wanton murderous bloodsheds, that would be your problem not mine.

Of course they did, because the scripture not only condones such behavior, it explicitly commands it's devotees to commit atrocities. Many renowned Theologians have acknowledged as much. For example;Thomas Acquinas and St. Augustine respectively argued, quite logically, on the basis of scripture, that heretics should be brutally tortured and executed.
That's quite a stretch to plead a case against the Bible based on Aquinas' and Augustine's own philosophical reasoning. The Bible already cautioned us against using man's wisdom (philosophy) to guide one's path. That's why so many Christians were misled.

This is completely false. It is repeatedly made clear, time and time again, that the old rules still apply.

For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.- Matthew 5:18-19

It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid.-Luke 16:17

Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.-Matthew 5:17

Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law.- John7:19

So, according to Jesus, the rules have not changed. The exhortations to barbarism of the Old Testament are still binding.Now, to recap, what does this law, which the son of god says we are obligated to uphold, actually say?

Here are some choice excerpts;

One who blasphemes the name of the LORD shall be put to death; the whole congregation shall stone the blasphemer. Aliens as well as citizens, when they blaspheme the Name, shall be put to death. (NRSV) — Leviticus 24:16

Anyone who dishonors father or mother must be put to death. Such a person is guilty of a capital offense. (NLT) -Leviticus 20:9

Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. (NIV) - Leviticus 25:44

If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them. (NRSV) - Leviticus 20:13

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. (NIV) -Timothy 2:11-12

If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.- Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT

A priest's daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. -Leviticus 21:9 NAB

I could do this all day, there are pages and pages of this barbaric crap, but I trust the point is made.
Nonsense.

Jesus himself is the embodiment of all that inclusive iota and dot because he is the Word. In the beginning was the Word (John 1:1). For He said, "I am the Sabbath". And when He died on the Cross, He fulfilled all the mosaic laws. However, the judgment of God's laws have not been completely fulfilled until Christ's return as King and Judge.

Those Leviticus laws you quoted were for the ancient Israelites. Other tribes living around them weren't even subject to the Leviticus laws, so why would you think modern day people should? More importantly, Jews after the destruction of the Temple had not practiced them. Modern day Jews and Christians never practice them, they don't believe they are for all time, so your attempt to find fault against Christians is futile and stretching at best.

On the contrary, devout muslims still practice the islamic commandments laid down in their quran and ahadith. The most important thing is thqt, in their own words, they do firmly believe that allah's commands are for all time and the emulation of mo down to naming just about every muslim as "mohammad" is an islamic duty.
 
I agree. If we start banning Islam then there are a lot of churches that need to be banned on the same criteria. Based on my experience going to a Southern Baptist school, that entire convention might be in trouble.

Well, these guys want to get rid of all of Islam, so you have to get rid of the entire religion if any of their members are hateful, violent, terrorists, etc.

That's the rule, right?
 
Well, these guys want to get rid of all of Islam, so you have to get rid of the entire religion if any of their members are hateful, violent, terrorists, etc.

That's the rule, right?
I guess so. So I guess we have to get rid of every single religion in history.
 
...It is obvious that you are sticking your head in the sand when you dishonestly try to claim that it’s merely “a couple dozen fanatics”....

Dude... again, WTF are you smoking? I never claimed Islam had a "couple dozen fanatics." I was talking about the Aum Shinrikyo group containing a couple dozen fanatics, that you ludicrously compared to Islam, a religon with more than one billion followers.

To refresh your memory:

Originally Posted by dolphinocean
So, you think that the Aum Shinrikyo group which was responsible for the sarin gas murder attack in Tokyo Subway and violent "religious" groups like that should just have the right to practice their religion in this country?

As for the rest of your cut-and-paste plagiarized diatribe, it was tl;dr.
 
to those who are quite open regarding their obvious bigotry i have a suggestion for you.

don't be shy in the real world. go get yourself a medical alert bracelet. engrave it with the words "i'm islamaphobic and a bigot and proud of it. you are not welcome here. get out."

then one day when you need medical assistance you might come across someone like Mohammed Salman Hamdani. hopefully they keep away from you as per your request andd leave your disgusting bigoted ass right where it lays and move onto someone else.
 
Dude... again, WTF are you smoking? I never claimed Islam had a "couple dozen fanatics." I was talking about the Aum Shinrikyo group containing a couple dozen fanatics, that you ludicrously compared to Islam, a religon with more than one billion followers.

To refresh your memory:



As for the rest of your cut-and-paste plagiarized diatribe, it was tl;dr.
That’s even a self-defeating argument.

Aum Shinrikyo had a couple dozen fanatics with only two somewhat successful terrorist attacks within less than a year period in only one city of only one country. But the whole “religion” is shunned and marked by every nation in the world. For their part in terror, they immediately lost their status as a religious organization and their assets were seized. Their organization in Russia suffered the same fate.

The Aum Shinrikyo founder, considered as holy pope by its members, received the death sentence even though he didn’t personally carry out the attack. Since then the remaining members had denounced their violent way with subsequent change of name to “Aleph”. Since the last subway attack in 1995 they have not been involved in any more terror activity. In addition, their previous members who were involved in the attacks were disbarred from current membership and they had apologized to the surviving victims and making amends by monetary compensation. Yet they were banned from some European countries and the new organization, Aleph, is still in the lists of terrorist groups of the U.S. State Department for the 1995 terror attack incident.

Source:
1. Aum Shinrikyo: Once and Future Threat?

2. Sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Now, contrast that to islam in which its prophet had kidnapped for ransoms, raped, raided, mass murdered, beheaded, dismembered, terrorized, enslaved and tortured innocent civilians by their own glorious accounts as contained in their islamic records such as the quran, the ahadith and sira which muslims held up as holy for direction and emulation. Yet, not only that mo wasn’t convicted as a criminal in public court of opinion, he was and still is touted as the most popular prophet.

Furthermore, muslims in general will protest in great multitude, even violently most of the time, against Western free expression of drawing or criticism of their prophet that resulted in innocent people who had nothing to do with anything being slaughtered.

Yet, in countless instances of muslim violence against non-muslims or even muslims themselves, there is always a deafening silence from their group. There is no apology from muslims except blaming the West for the cause of all muslim violence.

In terms of expecting them to denounce their fanatically violent members let alone expecting any monetary compensation, forget it.

Yet, the European figure heads and our three presidents considered and publicly proclaimed islam as the “religion” of peace. Never mind that islam has more than 1400 years of track records for all the violence seen throughout the world than Aum Shinrikyo organiztion and the Islamic violence keeps coming every day worldwide. Throughout all these disparity, yet I'm the one being accused of being illogical or smoking something. Go figure.

Here is a challenge for you and your comrades: if islam is still a religion after all these on-going islamic violence and should be protected by our first amendment, do you not think the repented “Aleph” group should at least be treated the same way?

Now, when are you going to speak out and protest our government for impinging their first amendment rights by banning them through the U.S. State Department terrorist group lists?



As for the rest of your cut-and-paste plagiarized diatribe, it was tl;dr.
I typed that post straight from my thought to the keyboard while razing against limited time. I challenge you to prove your assertion of my cut-and paste” plagiarism. You can easily produce the evidence by searching for it in the internet using the google search of the passages in my post. If you can’t, you owe me an apology for defamation, i.e. if you’re honorable.
 
Those those who are quick to condemn me as bigot or islamophobe or whatever name you wish to throw at me, why don't you treat this as an academic debate of reason and logic. Pretend we have no vested interest but took our position as the devil's advocates for the position we took and judge solely on the merit of reason alone. Fair?
 
Back to the issue that is Herman Cain, seems he's done an about face concerning religious tolerence and Muslims.

From FoxNews.com:

"While I stand by my opposition to the interference of Sharia law into the American legal system, I remain humble and contrite for any statements I have made that might have caused offense to Muslim Americans and their friends," said Cain.

"I am truly sorry for any comments that may have betrayed my commitment to the U.S. Constitution and the freedom of religion guaranteed by it. Muslims, like all Americans, have the right to practice their faith freely and peacefully."
 
Those those who are quick to condemn me as bigot or islamophobe or whatever name you wish to throw at me, why don't you treat this as an academic debate of reason and logic. Pretend we have no vested interest but took our position as the devil's advocates for the position we took and judge solely on the merit of reason alone. Fair?
You want to use logic and reason? How about the logic of the first amendment where it says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" forbidden the bullring of a mosque prohibits the free excises thereof.
 
Back to the issue that is Herman Cain, seems he's done an about face concerning religious tolerence and Muslims.

From FoxNews.com:

So, what, he just forgot about the constitution for a bit, and when it was pointed out he was like "OH YEAH! We have that first amendment thing. My bad."
 
So, what, he just forgot about the constitution for a bit, and when it was pointed out he was like "OH YEAH! We have that first amendment thing. My bad."
I think it probably want something more like this: "OH YEAH! We have that first amendment thing. Too bad, vote for me and I"ll fix that."
 
You want to use logic and reason? How about the logic of the first amendment where it says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" forbidden the bullring of a mosque prohibits the free excises thereof.
Yeah, it says “religion” not a sham religion with a not so hidden agenda of violent fascist political ideology that divides the world into believers and non-believers.

And it’s not just simply division, but one with bloodshed and an ultimate goal of conquering and submission to establish a worldwide caliphate. A caliphate is an islamic kingdom in which the ruler is a successor to its prophet, i.e. mo. This global caliphate movement had been boiling both outside and inside our own country for many years already. The recent arab spring revolution flaming all over the arab lands is part of the caliphate movement.

Here’s a direct quote from a research source:
“Do average Muslims dream of the Caliphate rule? Analyzing data from four Islamic countries gathered by PIPA in 2007, the answer is yes.”
Support for the Caliphate and Radical Mobilization. The National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terror (START), START Research Brief, January 2008.​

See also:
Like I said, the sham religion islam has already proven itself to be a very violent doctrine many times over since its beginning. It has a track record of 1400 years of robberies, rape, enslavement, torture, conquer and mass murders. They are there for you to see. Muslim terror jihadists overseas and in this country such as the time square bomber, the Fort Hood jihadist and the Little Rock, Arkansas muslim convert adulhakim mohammad had all told us their motivation for killing is to fight for the cause of allah. The now dead osama even quoted quran verses to tell us his islamic justification for his attacks. But, with all these, you simply ignore them all but choose to side with evil to risk our children and our country's future for your pride.

Before 1929 there was no immigration law barring immigration except Chinese immigrants on the ground of racial unassimilability. It had been done before, so why can’t we do the same again since muslims in general are unassimilable by choice.

Like I said, Aum/Aleph religious group and other cults combined were many times less violence than islam, so when are you going to speak out and protest against the U.S. State Department for singling out Aum/Aleph religious organization as terrorist group for the 1995 sarin gas attack incident? Where is your logic?
 
Yeah, it says “religion” not a sham religion with a not so hidden agenda of violent fascist political ideology that divides the world into believers and non-believers.

And it’s not just simply division, but one with bloodshed and an ultimate goal of conquering and submission to establish a worldwide caliphate. A caliphate is an islamic kingdom in which the ruler is a successor to its prophet, i.e. mo. This global caliphate movement had been boiling both outside and inside our own country for many years already. The recent arab spring revolution flaming all over the arab lands is part of the caliphate movement.

Here’s a direct quote from a research source:
“Do average Muslims dream of the Caliphate rule? Analyzing data from four Islamic countries gathered by PIPA in 2007, the answer is yes.”
Support for the Caliphate and Radical Mobilization. The National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terror (START), START Research Brief, January 2008.​

See also:
Like I said, the sham religion islam has already proven itself to be a very violent doctrine many times over since its beginning. It has a track record of 1400 years of robberies, rape, enslavement, torture, conquer and mass murders. They are there for you to see. Muslim terror jihadists overseas and in this country such as the time square bomber, the Fort Hood jihadist and the Little Rock, Arkansas muslim convert adulhakim mohammad had all told us their motivation for killing is to fight for the cause of allah. The now dead osama even quoted quran verses to tell us his islamic justification for his attacks. But, with all these, you simply ignore them all but choose to side with evil to risk our children and our country's future for your pride.

Before 1929 there was no immigration law barring immigration except Chinese immigrants on the ground of racial unassimilability. It had been done before, so why can’t we do the same again since muslims in general are unassimilable by choice.

Like I said, Aum/Aleph religious group and other cults combined were many times less violence than islam, so when are you going to speak out and protest against the U.S. State Department for singling out Aum/Aleph religious organization as terrorist group for the 1995 sarin gas attack incident? Where is your logic?
It is a religion. It might violent and reactionary as all hell, its not any worse than Christianity has been throughout its history by the way,but it is still a religion. It meets the definition of religion therefore it is religion. You can't compare Aum Shyraim to Islam. One is a new religious movement that has very few followers and has contributed nothing but violence. The other is 1400 years old has a a billion followers and has contributed greatly to civilization. Where do you think Algebra came from?
 
I like Cain. Go, Cain. He tells it like it is.
 
It is a religion. It might violent and reactionary as all hell, its not any worse than Christianity has been throughout its history by the way,but it is still a religion. It meets the definition of religion therefore it is religion. You can't compare Aum Shyraim to Islam. One is a new religious movement that has very few followers and has contributed nothing but violence. The other is 1400 years old has a a billion followers and has contributed greatly to civilization. Where do you think Algebra came from?
So, all you have is nothing but to insist it is a religion? It's a fallacy of argument by force.

Your "new" and "old" argument is pathetic. It's a fallacy, it doesn't prove anything. The most you proved is that islam has 1400 years of global violent track record as compared to Aum Shinrikyo's less than 2 year violent in one country. Your "few" or "more" argument is also a pathetic fallacy. Number doesn't prove anything. We can simply outlaw islam and make it illegal for any people to belief in islam worldwide, that would soon make them rare. That would achieve your illogical end.

Your comparison of islam's violence to Christianity's past history is also a fallacy of comparing apples and oranges. There is nothing in the Christian doctrine that can be used as justification for any violence. For islam, the whole islamic doctrine is based on violence and the command for its followers to emulate.

Regarding Algebra you're being fooled by islamic arab lie. The sham, islam, arose from a dry dirt sandland in 7th century mecca with no historical records, no ancient literatures, or artifacts of any kind; no nothing. All of a sudden they claimed every inventions others conquered by them had made. No, Algebra was from ancient India and Babylon long before mecca even existed.
 
So, all you have is nothing but to insist it is a religion? It's a fallacy of argument by force.

Your "new" and "old" argument is pathetic. It's a fallacy, it doesn't prove anything. The most you proved is that islam has 1400 years of global violent track record as compared to Aum Shinrikyo's less than 2 year violent in one country. Your "few" or "more" argument is also a pathetic fallacy. Number doesn't prove anything. We can simply outlaw islam and make it illegal for any people to belief in islam worldwide, that would soon make them rare. That would achieve your illogical end.

Your comparison of islam's violence to Christianity's past history is also a fallacy of comparing apples and oranges. There is nothing in the Christian doctrine that can be used as justification for any violence. For islam, the whole islamic doctrine is based on violence and the command for its followers to emulate.

Regarding Algebra you're being fooled by islamic arab lie. The sham, islam, arose from a dry dirt sandland in 7th century mecca with no historical records, no ancient literatures, or artifacts of any kind; no nothing. All of a sudden they claimed every inventions others conquered by them had made. No, Algebra was from ancient India and Babylon long before mecca even existed.
I've given the actual dictionary definitions of religion and you've ignored them. Should I quote sociologist on this issue? How can I prove to you it's a religion if you ignore facts. I swear do facts mean nothing to you people. If you're going to ignore the very definition of religion then talking to you is pointless.
 
Last edited:
I've given the actual dictionary definitions of religion and you've ignored them. Should I quote sociologist on this issue? How can I prove to you it's a religion if you ignore facts. I swear do facts mean nothing to you people. If you're going to ignore the very definition of religion then talking to you is pointless.
Your talking to me is pointless because, like I said, your appeal to dictionary definition is a self-defeating argument. Sad thing is you don’t even realize your own doing of self-destruct.

If you so insist, then let’s go through the definition you posted:
1.the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power , especially a personal God or gods:ideas about the relationship between science and religion2.a particular system of faith and worship 3.a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance:consumerism is the new religion Link:definition of religion from Oxford Dictionaries Online
Number 1 encompasses every cults, even the violent ones such as Jim Jones’ People’s
Temple cult, David Koresh’s Branch Davidian, Shoko Asahar’s Aum Shinrikyo, etc. They are considered violent cults by our government and other nations and as such were aggressively dealt with and banned, yet you would consider them “religions” by your very definition. Since our government and other world leaders had been aggressively prosecuting members of these “religions” and banned their “religious” organizations from teaching their hate filled doctrines, so what if you insist that islam is a religion by your defintion. Our govenment and our people can still aggressively prosecute and outlaw them as we did the other cults. I don’t see you or your flocks crying about them being persecuted. See your pointlessness? See how you self-destruct?

Likewise for number 2, your definition includes every cult plus criminal elements with elaborate system of hierarchy and propcedures whose leader is worshipped as invincible figure, such as charles manson and the godfathers of organized gangs. Since our government and other world leaders had been aggressively prosecuted them for their criminal behavior and did everything in their power to outlaw them, so what if you consider islam as a religion? I don’t see you or your flocks speak out about their First Amendment being violated. See your pointlessness? See how you self-destruct?

As for number 3, as it said, consumerism would be considered a “religion”. So, when have you or your cohorts spoke out against the government for the war against drugs? Shouldn’t consumers of cocaine, meths and other hardcore or soft core drugs be up to the consumers’ right of consumption to do so by the First Amendment right to religion? See your pointlessness? See how you self-destruct?

Talk about facts, you don’t know a thing about anything, let alone facts. For your info, Aum Shrinkiyo wasn’t exactly a “new religion” or very small as you said. Here’s the quote from CDC.gov website:

The cult's operations were worldwide, promoting a theology drawn from different sources, including Buddhism, Christianity, Shamanism, Hinduism, and New Age beliefs. Cult membership around the world was likely 20,000 to 40,000 Aum Shinrikyo: Once and Future Threat?
Aum Shinrikyo had foundation from several ancient religions that had 3,000 to more than 4,000 years of history. Much, much older than islam, being only about 1400 years the most. Besides, those major religions have doctrines that teach love and peace. Not hate and murder like islam. So, based on your new vs old argument, we can just throw out islam for being not only very violent but also relatively very new.
 
A mosque in TN infringes on my religion the way medical marijuana infringes on my right to smoke tobacco
 
So the bible isn't the word of God? Phew, that's a relief. It's also good to know that bible verses can expire. I guess that makes The Gay ok now, right? The bible definitely can be edited at will!

Much of what is in the Old Testament is HISTORY, but when God's word is given (ie the Ten Commandments), that is instructions from God (though, some of those instructions and rules have been countermanded by Jesus, Himself)
 
then why in the **** does the catholic church tell you not to take communion if you vote for a pro choice candidate?

I believe it is individual priests/bishops calling for that, and not the Church... and so long as the believer has not been excommunicated, it is not binding. Could you please provide a citation so I can look at the situation you are referring to?
 
Back
Top Bottom