Muslims anger at Popes remarks

[speedymama]

Story here .

I wonder if a Fatwa will be taken out against the Pope who had the temerity to say something about Islam? His comments have been misconstrued and to be honest, I don't understand what all the fuss is about.

Both Christianity and Islam have a bloodthirsty history but I think that Muslims are becoming too hypersensitive towards their religion. Why is it that clerics like Abu Hanza can stand on the streets of London, spewing hateful rhetoric about the West but the minute anybody in the West says something about Islam, Muslims around the world get their headscarves and beards in a twist? Chill out for goodness sake. I don't recall the Muslim collective condenming the Iranian President when he called for Israel to be wiped of the planet. I'm certain that there are many Muslims who make disparaging remarks about Judaism, Hinduism, Christianity, Sikhism etc. Religion is not just about words, it is about living up to what you preach and how you treat others. No wonder so many people in this country are turned off religion.

I personally agreed with everything the Pope said and interestingly, so did my male Muslim friend.

I don't know why anyone thinks the pope's job is not to incite religious hatred.

That's never been part of the job description, afaik.

So democracy is ok if it brings in Sharia law then eh Saadia??

After that,I presume it is no longer needed?

Please expound.

Really Bibliophile!!! You have to understand firstly that Muslims believe in abiding the laws of the land where they live.

But when you say Sharia Law you probably mean beheadings and floggings, whereas I mean a whole host of rules covering trade, family relations, relations between neighbous, treatment of children, education, and not just the narrow and incredibly ignorant interpretation that many completely unread people assume.

Why is it so shocking that as a practising and believing Muslim I would want society to follow the ideals that I believe in? For example, Islam prohibits the consumption of alcohol, which makes perfect sense to me considering the problems that alcohol creates for society.

Why do people generalise so much?
Quote:"When correctly implemented I believe an Islamic society would be one where broken marriages, crime, child abuse, were under control. I would like to live in such a society."
Why, how very simplistic. How can crime, child abuse and divorce be "under control"? Surely you mean hidden from society, where it will not offend those who do not want to know it is happening?
I would like to live in a society where all was as it should be, and nobody hurt or offended their fellow man, but I don't see it happening too soon (if ever). Utopia is the ideal that we all look to, but as we all have ideas of our own utopia, thay are not going to fit together in such a simplistic way.
It would be nice if we all learnt to empathise with our fellow man/woman, but this would require a massive amount of effort from all parties.
Extremism comes in many guises, in all religions, all of which think they are "Right". It is the extremist element that causes the friction that ignites the flame of hatred.
I do not know you, and you do not know me, so how can you base your knoweldge of me on my religion (or lack of)?....................................................................................................Right I'm off to burn an effigy of my husband, as he didn't wipe the toilet seat after using the loo, any body want to join in?

Did I say that Moondog????

I'm not talking about imposing Sharia on infidels, I'm talking about letting Muslims live according to the rules that they believe in.

saadia, I can understand that, as one of a limited number of muslim posters on MN you must feel undre pressure on these sorts of threads.

I have the greatest personal respect for you, and have always found your posts to be well tought out, and interesting, even thought I do not always agree with you.

I have, however , been shocked by the word, 'infadel' in your last post.

While Islam (rightly) berated Bush for his tactless use of the word 'crusade', I feel the time has probably come for Mulsims to stop calling non believers,'infadels', don't you?

Well, yes there probably would be less infidelity if women got stoned or flogged or hanged for it. But some of think that is utterly sick, depraved and immoral.
If a Western, Christian nation voted democratically to bring back slavery, would that then be OK? I'd say not.

Post of 1:41 Saadia.
Democracy and Sharia are by definition incompatible.
Unless like you,you want to use one to bring in t'other.
(As do lots of Muslims in UK)

But I am an infidel. I don't mind being called one. I wouldn't like to be stoned for it though.

Sharia law is not incompatible with democracy, or indeed any other form of government.

It is not even incompatible with the common law system upon which American and British democracy are based.

It's tempting to regard "democracy" (however you define it), as some sort of inherent good, a goal in itself, or worse still some sort of moral imperative.
Since Sharia's a pile of malevolent shit, you would therefore assume that our smart shiny white people's system is Sharia's enemy, a misconception shared by the deluded fools who long for Sharia.
Democracy is a technology, it is a mechanism for making better decisions in large groups. It goes wrong sometimes, but is the least worst system we know.

You don't need any particular system of law for democracy. Democracy is how you make laws and appoint the executive which operates under them.

British democracy (the mother of parliaments), was born of a legal system which was operated largely by clerics, and entirely by people trained in religious schools and universities. ?St? Thomas More?s job as a lawyer was to arrange the torture and execution by fire of dissidents against the Catholic church. So skilled was he at imposing pain and fear that Henry VIII promoted him.
In many respects, Oxford in 1800 with it's ban on women, and production line for men to go off to fight for and run an empire is surprisingly like a Pakistani Madrassar. Except of course 19th century Brits were good at killing people, and the average Moslem army is more dangerous to it?s own country than it?s enemies. Does being better at war really indicate we are superior ? When was the last time a democracy lost a war ?

The flaw in implementations of Sharia is the failure of nearly all Moslem societies.
Islam is no worse a way of deciding what is right and wrong than Christianity, indeed since it as based on later, better, thinking it is far more rational.
But most Moslems haven?t worked out that if you?re going to run anything bigger than a town of about 10,000 people, you need a separation of church and state.
The nearest thing to a civilized Moslem country is Turkey. Note that they have a hardline separation.

"Sharia's a pile of malevolent shit"

Very fucking helpful and constructive. You nob.

Actually I would really rather avoid these threads as the same people always appear with the same views and it leads nowhere. But when people bring up my name in a negative way I have no choice but to respond.

Apologies mb for using the term infidel, I did not mean to cause offence.

I don't agree DC.

Yes,Turkey isn't bad (I live there) but lots of other problems too,starting with personality cult of Ataturk (although he was a good bloke)

No worries Saadia

I know it has a historical usage that is 'neutral' but it has become 'hitched' over the years to less pleasent uses.

We all need to be more careful in use of words if dialogue is to happen.

I am reasonably happy for the use of the word 'nob' though

Indeed Turkey is far from perfect, that's why I was careful not to refer to it as civilised.
All systems have gross failures, and lest we grow too smug, don't forget ours gave us Bush, Blair, Sharon, Callaghan, Chirac, and of course Hitler.

That's why we need to stop thinking of democracy as a morality, and more of a machine. The fastest cars have the most spectacular accidents.
If Bush was African, he'd be hailed as the next Nelson Mandela.

as a system of law and justice sharia makes apartheid look like utopia. I agree with dc on this point if no other.

Ooooo it's all kicked off since this morning then?

The Pope has actually apologised just to clarify matters. I wonder if the Muslims would ever apologise for things such as the holocaust denial or the bloodshed they have been responsible for? In fact, have they ever apologised for anything?

From what I have seen of the Islamic faith, and with great respect to Aloha for this, it seems to read like this

Oh and I love the Jesus quote about the sword btw, just funny that I can't seem to find it in my Bible!

Matthiew 10:34

Don't think that I came to send peace on the earth. I didn't come to send peace, but a sword.

35 For I came to set a man at odds against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.

36 A man's foes will be those of his own household.

I don;'t know how is reads in the Catholic version of the bible, it might be different.

37 He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me isn't worthy of me.

sorry, put my own words in the quote, I am not claiming divine inspiration honest

And personaly I feel that text is saying, 'My words are going to shake people up' rather than 'Look out, I'm coming to get you with my sword' but that is only the intepretation of a lapsed Baptist, Biology teacher.

But the words are there

Found it! He is instructing his disciples in what lies ahead. It is not a public address. Remember that this is a man who, when Peter raised his sword to defend him against the soldiers in the Garden of Gethsemane Jesus severely rebuked him and healed the soldier whose ear Peter had cut off. When they were whipping him and spitting on him he did not raise his hands to defend himself. He even prayed for their forgiveness whilst he was dying on the cross. This was not a man of violence.

Oh and the last quote Matthew 37 is the reason why priests are not allowed to marry in the catholic church, because spouses and children would be competing against God and the church felt this was an unfair pressure to put on their priests. You can however be a married deacon who basically does everything a priest does but he cannot do the blessing at Mass or hear confession.

I'm full of useless information me!

So the best priest would be a clone?

Grown by asexual reproduction

Are you not the tiniest bit impressed that a 'heathen' like me, came up with it so quickly?...all those years in Sunday school didn't go to waste

Yes I am very impressed! Big clap hands and shouts of "GOOD GIRL"

Course I know all these quotes off by heart of course. I am the font of all knowledge!