Upwards of a billion Muslims want Sharia law instituted. So, I'm not
sure where you get this .2% figure.


https://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/...iety-overview/


Some of the fun stuff that is in Sharia law:

• Theft is punishable by amputation of the hands (Quran 5:38).
• Criticizing or denying any part of the Quran is punishable by death.
• Criticizing Muhammad or denying that he is a prophet is punishable by death.
• Criticizing or denying Allah is punishable by death (see Allah moon god).
• A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by death (See Compulsion).
• A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam is punishable by death.
• A non-Muslim man who marries a Muslim woman is punishable by death.
• A woman or girl who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s).
• Testimonies of 4 male witnesses are required to prove rape of a female (Quran 24:13).
• A woman or girl who alleges rape without producing 4 male witnesses is guilty of adultery.
• A woman or girl found guilty of adultery is punishable by death (see "Islamophobia").
• A male convicted of rape can have his conviction dismissed by marrying his victim.
• Muslim men have sexual rights to any woman/girl not wearing the Hijab (see Taharrush).
• A woman can have 1 husband, who can have up to 4 wives; Muhammad can have more.
• A man can marry an infant girl and consummate the marriage when she is 9 years old.
• Girls' clitoris should be cut (Muhammad's words, Book 41, Kitab Al-Adab, Hadith 5251).
• A man can beat his wife for insubordination (see Quran 4:34 and Religion of Peace).
• A man can unilaterally divorce his wife; a wife needs her husband's consent to divorce.
• A divorced wife loses custody of all children over 6 years of age or when they exceed it.
• A woman's testimony in court, allowed in property cases, carries ½ the weight of a man's.
• A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits (see Mathematics in Quran).
• A woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative.
• Meat to eat must come from animals that have been sacrificed to Allah - i.e., be "Halal."
• Muslims should engage in Taqiyya and lie to non-Muslims to advance Islam.

There is more then one version/interpretation of Sharia law. But you have been told this before and keep pushing misinformation so...

The article Bill linked stated:

"90% of Muslim-Americans say that they are “proud to be American.” That doesn’t sound much like “hatred of the West."

Muslim-Americans make up .2% of all Muslims (so their being proud of being American says nothing about the overall Muslim population's views on the West, whatever it happened to be).

This is only slightly more specific than "laws that have been passed on earth."

Would it be just as valid to characterize Judeo-Christianity by any rule that has ever existed in the west?

Zit, you think Sharia is one particular thing.

The largest and most long-lived Muslim polity was the Ottoman Empire, which was even a caliphate.

The Ottoman 1858 penal code legalized sodomy. Please explain how this premier example of Muslim law fits with your conception of Sharia.

From linked article:

Note Britain was still castrating gays (chemically) in the 1950s, see: Alan Turing.

Um, what "misinformation" did I push?

Saying definitively what sharia is when that is not what it is to many Muslims.

Like ive said before its also counter productive. You chose the harshest version of sharia and declare it sharia. How do you think that helps liberal Muslims fight the more extremes. If you are going to interpret their religion for them learn about liberal Islamic teachings and push those. At least then you would be helpful.

I read the Sam Harris book from 2004 I think called THE END OF FAITH.

I do not see how anybody could disagree with what he has to say. Well, I do see how. People who have been brainwashed from birth and people that don't know how to do critical thinking.

I would highly recommend this book - as on point today as it was in 2004. I know the title Common Sense has been taken - but that title would work for the book by Harris as well.

Is this how he always is? Toss around blood libel then not give a lick of justification?

I believe this is one of two threads that show in detail Harris' shortcomings. We've looked mainly at his ill informed chapter on Islam. You might start with the quick Juan Cole articles linked above. Cole is a specialist, while Harris has no language skills, did no interviews, and did not visit Arabia. He simply does not know what he is talking about.

This exact same line is one that flat earthers use to justify their beliefs. You may want to try to do better.

This I appreciated and can only give pause;

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/qant...uslim-religion

In what way is Ilhan Omar an Islamist? She is Muslim and a politician, but mainly AFAIK supports mostly progressive policies which most Islamists oppose.

OK

Does it give you any pause labeling her an extremist when the right doing that puts her in danger?

Everyone is full of fight; the piece was the honest considerations of a Muslim, as to how she saw 9/11 and other events. She wasn't in denial and I appreciated that, not so much any disparagement of another.

She also appreciates what our country has accomplished with respect to Muslims as compared to the difficulties Muslims are having in Europe. I was also happy to hear some one say ( a Muslim), that our country is doing some good in this realm .

The dyscrasia fostered out of the political forces of the deceit of power(s) is enervating to the average man (from the center of the earth) and the "boys in the band" refuse to see it.

As to my " give one pause", it was unclear, obviously, and so I'll try to do it better. I noted the antipathies to the Muslim in the thread and felt it would be good to reference a Muslim offering good thoughts, and in my mind, as a true human being.

It doesn't mean the difficulties will go away because a "wand has been waved" but any morsel helps.

A long while back I was reading investment advice from a stock market guru whose name I have forgotten, who also offered some social meanderings in a homily way. He offered that the human being, Man, will have to change his very being in in order to emerge from the morass( realized or unrealized) of the times.

He said (wrote) it in such a manner that one could feel the heart felt warmth within the words that they became alive in one's soul and so never forgotten.

A story of Christ Jesus as He and his disciples walked by a dead decomposing dog to which the disciples treated with a dismissive contempt while He expressed wonder at the glisten of the shining teeth that lay before them within the corpse of that dog.

Guess not. People like trump are going to get her killed. You should be more worried about their words then hers.

Whee.... It's Trump's fault... wheee

Sigh, blame Trump for anything and everything, for no
reason, just because.

I blame the entire right and people like you who demonize Islam for the increased hate crimes towards them too.

No reasons to blame trump. Give me a ****ing break he tried to ban all Muslims. Posted derogatory vids of her. Has tweets talking about her being extremely unpatriotic. Has been scaremongering Islam from the start and is scaremongering her now.

I think we need to worry about both.

Sure i guess. What words of hers are you worried about?

Do you think some words should be more worried about or are all things equal? Because i said.

" You should be more worried about their words then hers. "

"Some people did something." Sounds like she's minimizing what the extremist factions in Islam perpetrated on 9/11.

She could have pointed out that CAIR was created to protect Muslim-Americans from unreasonable scrutiny and at the same time unequivocally condemned the actions of Al Qaeda.

No one religion has cornered the market on extremism.

In my mind religion in general is the problem. When you base you actions on unprovable absolutes, you invite extremism. But that's a different discussion.

I dont see it that way in full context.

She is not minimizing 911 there imo.

She should not need to but it would of been smarter.
She would agree with that id guess.

I dont agree but alright.

Which is amusing, as this is an unprovable absolute claim. No doubt you've based a certain amount of your anti-religious advocacy on this...

In an ideal world, her words would be taken at face value.

Unfortunately, we don't. Nobody's words really get taken at face value, unless they happened to have died a long time ago and we don't know anything about them except the words they left behind. And even then, we're capable of disagreeing so badly about what such words mean, that we can end up killing each-other.

That said, I do think she has on several occasions worded herself poorly. This is one of those times. "Some people did something" is just a poor choice of words. Yes, she gets punished more harshly because of how she looks, her dress, her religion, that's the unfair bit. But it's a pretty poor choice of words regardless.

[My bold and strike through]


I'll address the bolded part and disagree, with the qualification that, yes it is a poor choice of words. But in the overall context, I like what she said and am glad that she expressed it so. The fact that she was not even more blunt about 9/11 shows that she is disingenuous to a great degree, and not just because of political reasons.


Do you see why?