May I ask what your religion is TheDivineHustle and ToeBius?

1 hour ago, Hystery said:

 

The only thing I find when Googling "Texas sharia law" are articles saying that Texas passed an anti-sharia law (which is already a thing in many places in the world and just makes sense as religious laws and civil laws shouldn't be mixed) and a Breitbart article that has been debunked as fake. So I wouldn't mind having trustworthy sources about Muslims "attempting to make sharia law legal on a local level". 

https://www.islamictribunal.org/about-it/

 

Here you go.  They contradict everything they appear to want.  Just read

7 minutes ago, CathbolBagel said:

May I ask what your religion is TheDivineHustle and ToeBius?

I do not have a religion.  My entire family is religious, all of them being of different religion's.

9 minutes ago, CathbolBagel said:

May I ask what your religion is TheDivineHustle and ToeBius?

Christian.

Who does freedom come from?  Can any government impede on your freedom?

7 minutes ago, CathbolBagel said:

Who does freedom come from?  Can any government impede on your freedom?

I believe that God gives us freedom, and the government cannot impede on it.

Thru Christ we have freedom, and the government can do whatever they want, and we'll still have total freedom.

Edited March 20, 20188 yr by CathbolBagel

Did the Muslims Bomb Dresden, Hiroshima,Nagasaki,Belgrad,etc. ?

 

 

12 hours ago, TheDivineHustle said:

That's a completely different theological discussion that I'm not going to partake in right now.

 

 

You're choosing not to partake because you have no counter argument, you know I'm right.  Hustle, you can't pick and choose what you decide to respond to.  If you're going to go all out in this debate, you damn well better have a response ready for when someone makes a valid point.

 

At this point, there's no reason to even continue debating this.  Debating with you just goes around in an endless loop with everyone saying the exact damn thing.

7 hours ago, ToeBius said:

https://www.islamictribunal.org/about-it/

 

Here you go.  They contradict everything they appear to want.  Just read

 

No, they don't. All I read on that page is the implementation of an islamic tribunal, for muslims only (and thus, you and other people wouldn't be concerned, so your rights and freedom aren't endangered, as I was saying before), and that this islamic tribunal would have to "conform to legal proceedings at the local, state and federal level", and that "these proceedings must be conducted in accordance with the law of the land; local, state and federal within the United States" (therefore abiding to the US laws and rules). There's nothing there about enforcing anything. If anything, they're open to discussions to open this kind of islamic tribunal with legal professionals (as stated in the very last paragraph of that page), therefore not forcing anything on anyone.

 

Let me ask you something: did you know that jews have a similar system? It's called beth din, it's a jewish tribunal for jewish people to settle their matters according to their religion's rules and precepts. Why does the islamic tribunal bother you (since it doesn't concern you or anyone else who isn't a muslim), but not the beth din? Why would jewish have the right to have their own religious court (which has legal powers), but not muslims?

 

7 hours ago, TheDivineHustle said:

I don't quite understand how the context can be any different. It seems like a rather straight-forward command from Allah.

 

I love how you say "there's no context, Allah tells muslims to do that" when you're talking about a verse from the Qu'ran, but when it's a verse coming from the Bible, you say "There's context to that, it's only sinners and people found guilty of something". Your double standards are going very far, mate.

 

7 hours ago, TheDivineHustle said:

I would say it is, and the founding fathers of this country would also agree, evidently. Freedom is an amazing thing, it's truly beautiful.

 

And yet you want to prevent people from practicing the religion they want. Isn't that beautiful as well.

Edited March 20, 20188 yr by Hystery

10 hours ago, Giordano said:

 

You're choosing not to partake because you have no counter argument, you know I'm right.  Hustle, you can't pick and choose what you decide to respond to.  If you're going to go all out in this debate, you damn well better have a response ready for when someone makes a valid point.

 

At this point, there's no reason to even continue debating this.  Debating with you just goes around in an endless loop with everyone saying the exact damn thing.

If that's the conclusion that you've come to, then that's fine. Your point isn't valid at all, it's completely wrong. It's off-topic and it will lead to a debate on the validity and theological concept/philosophy of Christianity. I'm not here to debate my religion or argue with you on something that you clearly don't understand. That's not why I'm participating in this discussion. So, no, I will not partake in that argument because it's an argument for a completely different discussion.

 

I'm also still waiting for some responses from you and a few others since we're going to get nit-picky about the debate. @c13 also never received responses to a few of his questions.

6 hours ago, Hystery said:

And yet you want to prevent people from practicing the religion they want. Isn't that beautiful as well.

 

I want to prevent people from practicing a religion that calls for Sharia Law, and removing the freedoms of others, even if it hasn't been enacted at this time, yes.

Quote

I love how you say "there's no context, Allah tells muslims to do that" when you're talking about a verse from the Qu'ran, but when it's a verse coming from the Bible, you say "There's context to that, it's only sinners and people found guilty of something". Your double standards are going very far, mate.

1

Because, if you weren't aware, Islam and Christianity are two different religions. You also continue to pull scripture from the Old Testament, which is before the resurrection of Jesus Christ and before he forgave us for our sins; which freed us from having to suffer the consequences set forth in the Old Testament to sin, such as stoning. That's where the whole, "Jesus is the savior" thing comes in. He saved us by dying on the cross so that we can ask God for forgiveness when we sin, rather than face his wrath. That's why I say there's context to the scripture of the Bible verses the scripture of the Quran.

 

You're making it very clear that you have very little knowledge of both the Quran and the Bible, as well as the theology associated with both respective religions. Can you provide me with the violent verses of the Quran and explain what exactly they mean, as I've done with the Bible?

 

I'll patiently wait.

 

Edited March 20, 20188 yr by TheDivineHustle

19 minutes ago, TheDivineHustle said:

I want to prevent people from practicing a religion

 

Stop right there. First line of the first amendment to the Constitution of USA:

 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

 

I thought you valued the Constitution? The founding fathers were even more clear here than you have claimed they were with the 2nd amendment. It specifically prohibits any laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Just now, willpv23 said:

 

Stop right there. First line of the first amendment to the Constitution of USA:

 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

 

I thought you valued the Constitution? The founding fathers were even more clear here than you have claimed they were with the 2nd amendment. It specifically prohibits any laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

....under the implication that the specified religion doesn't impede on the freedoms of other Americans, in which Islam does.

14 minutes ago, TheDivineHustle said:

....under the implication that the specified religion doesn't impede on the freedoms of other Americans, in which Islam does.

 

But...it doesn't. Not in America. So, women have no freedom according to Islam. This is America - you are free to not practice that religion if you disagree with it. They choose to continuing practicing it. It already is illegal to kill or legally punish someone for breaking the "Islamic rules" here. If you have an issue with the religion, then fine, it is your right to have that opinion, but it is also their right to practice it. You can state as many facts about the Middle East as you want, but none of that applies to America. Whatever violence the Quran commands is already illegal here. It makes literally zero sense for you to want to abolish Islam in America.

12 minutes ago, willpv23 said:

 

Stop right there. First line of the first amendment to the Constitution of USA:

 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

 

I thought you valued the Constitution? The founding fathers were even more clear here than you have claimed they were with the 2nd amendment. It specifically prohibits any laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Again, every Muslim-Majority country practices Sharia Law. Sharia Law completely contradicts the Constitution. It completely contradicts basic human rights, such as freedom of religion, education, equality among genders, equality among races.

 

Anyone who isn't a devout Muslim in a country that practices Sharia Law is a 2nd class citizen, and half of the Muslim population might as well be a 3rd class citizen. Women can't receive an education. Women can't own property. Saudi Arabia just recently started allowing women to drive, and that's a far more progressive country than most that practice Sharia Law. People who are openly Homosexuals get imprisoned or executed. If a woman goes some where unescorted by a man and gets raped, SHE gets stoned to death for adultery.

 

Islam isn't just a religion, it's a form of government.

1 minute ago, c13 said:

Again, every Muslim-Majority country practices Sharia Law. Sharia Law completely contradicts the Constitution. It completely contradicts basic human rights, such as freedom of religion, education, equality among genders, equality among races.

 

Anyone who isn't a devout Muslim in a country that practices Sharia Law is a 2nd class citizen, and half of the Muslim population might as well be a 3rd class citizen. Women can't receive an education. Women can't own property. Saudi Arabia just recently started allowing women to drive, and that's a far more progressive country than most that practice Sharia Law. People who are openly Homosexuals get imprisoned or executed. If a woman goes some where unescorted by a man and gets raped, SHE gets stoned to death for adultery.

 

Islam isn't just a religion, it's a form of government.

 

Which does not apply at all, in anyway whatsoever, to America. You can't ban something here and expect it to make a difference over there. Really, all banning it would do is give them fuel to launch more terrorists attacks against us.

8 minutes ago, c13 said:

Islam isn't just a religion, it's a form of government.

 

No, it's not. It's a religion, and some happen to use it as a form of government. However it's not in the US, nor in any western country that doesn't have Islam as its main religion. Therefore this argument doesn't apply to any of said countries, and there's absolutely no reason to ban Islam. At least not more than any other existing religion.

Just now, willpv23 said:

 

Which does not apply at all, in anyway whatsoever, to America. You can't ban something here and expect it to make a difference over there.

Except we can ban something here and prevent it from bringing its problems over here. History has shown that when a country's primary religion becomes Islam, Sharia Law is implemented.

4 minutes ago, willpv23 said:

 

Really, all banning it would do is give them fuel to launch more terrorists attacks against us.

So we should accept a religion that is most likely violent and at the very least commits blatant human rights violations on a daily basis because if we don't, they will attack us?

 

You talk about how it's funny that 2nd amendment supporters don't care about the constitution when it comes to this issue, I find it funny that your side doesn't care about blatant human rights violations as long as it's done under a religion that is seen as persecuted.

 

And again, what country that practices Sharia Law would you like to live in?

2 minutes ago, Hystery said:

 

No, it's not. It's a religion, and some happen to use it as a form of government. However it's not in the US, nor in any western country that doesn't have Islam as its main religion. Therefore this argument doesn't apply to any of said countries, and there's absolutely no reason to ban Islam. At least not more than any other existing religion.

Key phrase there:"that doesn't have Islam as its main religion"

16 minutes ago, c13 said:

Except we can ban something here and prevent it from bringing its problems over here. History has shown that when a country's primary religion becomes Islam, Sharia Law is implemented.

 

"Bringing its problems over here"? What does that even mean? Do you think America will suddenly become the Middle East if we don't ban Islam? America isn't meant to have a primary religion, that's kind of the whole idea.

 

16 minutes ago, c13 said:

So we should accept a religion that is most likely violent and at the very least commits blatant human rights violations on a daily basis because if we don't, they will attack us?

 

I'm not really sure how a religion is going to attack us, and isn't what I meant. Extremists will want to attack us even more than they do now, both those living here in America and those abroad. Pretty sure terrorism is illegal regardless of religion, although I haven't checked the laws recently. I'm not really sure why we need to specifically ban Islam when we can just say it's illegal to do the violent, human right violating aspects of it.

 

If we banned Christianity, what do you think the general response would be?

 

16 minutes ago, c13 said:

You talk about how it's funny that 2nd amendment supporters don't care about the constitution when it comes to this issue, I find it funny that your side doesn't care about blatant human rights violations as long as it's done under a religion that is seen as persecuted.

 

I wouldn't call it "my side," unless pointing out hypocrisy is a "side." For "blatant human rights violations" and which country I would live in....I am talking about America here. Islam is not our government, and never will be. The fact that it is the governing system in other countries is completely irrelevant to America. I don't think I've ever said it was good that Islam governs those countries, and have completely moved on from the "Islam is violent" aspect of the debate to the "banning Islam is not only unconstitutional, but also doesn't make sense" aspect of it.

1 minute ago, willpv23 said:

 

"Bringing its problems over here"? What does that even mean? Do you think America will suddenly become the Middle East if we don't ban Islam? America isn't meant to have a primary religion, that's kind of the whole idea.

The problems are the human rights violations.

 

Again, whenever a country has a majority of its people practicing Islam, Islam becomes the primary religion by law.

 

4 minutes ago, willpv23 said:

I'm not really sure how a religion is going to attack us, and isn't what I meant. Extremists will want to attack us even more than they do now, both those living here in America and those abroad. Pretty sure terrorism is illegal regardless of religion, although I haven't checked the laws recently. I'm not really sure why we need to specifically ban Islam when we can just say it's illegal to do the violent, human right violating aspects of it.

 

If we banned Christianity, what do you think the general response would be?

Again, Sharia Law is the end goal of Islam. The whole point I have been making is that Sharia Law is implemented when a country has a populace that primarily worships Islam. Laws can be changed pretty easily once a majority of the population feels a certain way.

 

10 minutes ago, willpv23 said:

I wouldn't call it "my side," unless pointing out hypocrisy is a "side." For "blatant human rights violations" and which country I would live in....I am talking about America here. Islam is not our government, and never will be. The fact that it is the governing system is other countries is completely irrelevant to America. I don't think I've ever said it was good that Islam governs those countries, and have completely moved on from the "Islam is violent" aspect of the debate to the "banning Islam is not only unconstitutional, but also doesn't make sense" aspect of it.

The problem is that Islam is fundamentally incompatible with the constitution because it explicitly goes against beliefs such as freedom of religion and equality. Christianity has adapted to the times, but Islam hasn't.

3 hours ago, Hystery said:

No, it's not. It's a religion, and some happen to use it as a form of government. However it's not in the US, nor in any western country that doesn't have Islam as its main religion. Therefore this argument doesn't apply to any of said countries, and there's absolutely no reason to ban Islam. At least not more than any other existing religion.

1

Islam is a religion and a form of government, that is fact. Whether you believe that Islam is violent or should be banned is an opinion, but it is a fact that Islam is a controlling ideology, with the implication that it is to essentially act as a form of government over its followers. It's in the name, actually. "Sharia Law". If you knew a little more about Islam, you would know this; which is also why you're more tolerant of Islam. Because those that know least about Islam tend to be more tolerant towards it, which makes perfect sense. I'm not attacking you, just making observations based on statistics and what I've read throughout this debate.

 

I'm also still awaiting my Quran verses and their contextual meanings.

3 hours ago, willpv23 said:

I'm not really sure why we need to specifically ban Islam when we can just say it's illegal to do the violent, human right violating aspects of it.

 

That'd be because Islam is what's motivating people to do the violent, human rights violating actions.

Quote

If we banned Christianity, what do you think the general response would be?

It wouldn't make any sense to ban Christianity. The most dangerous terrorists on the planet by far are Muslim extremists, not Christians.

Quote

I wouldn't call it "my side," unless pointing out hypocrisy is a "side." For "blatant human rights violations" and which country I would live in....I am talking about America here. Islam is not our government, and never will be. The fact that it is the governing system in other countries is completely irrelevant to America. I don't think I've ever said it was good that Islam governs those countries, and have completely moved on from the "Islam is violent" aspect of the debate to the "banning Islam is not only unconstitutional, but also doesn't make sense" aspect of it.

I don't believe that a ban on Islam would be unconstitutional because Islam unconstitutionally prohibits free-will. I find that people who show more favorable opinions of Islam seem to know least about Islam, which is also a statistical fact.

 

Edited March 20, 20188 yr by TheDivineHustle