doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Down to one.

Mike, you can find a lot of contradictory verses in the Koran. And some Muslim scholars will explain that these verses take precedence; other Muslim scholars will say otherwise.

Here's something interesting: Just this past January, "hundreds of Muslim scholars and intellectuals" gathered in Marrakesh, Morocco--the result of which was the Marrakesh Declaration. The declaration begins by referring to the current situation in the Muslim world, which " . . . enabled criminal groups to issue edicts attributed to Islam, but which, in fact, alarmingly distort its fundamental principles and goals . . . " Pretty much a direct shot at ISIS and AQ.

What people have to remember about Islam is that it is a non-hierarchical religion. (Especially true of Sunni Islam.) There is no pope, no cardinals, bishops, etc. Any imam can issue a "fatwa" (religious declaration). However, the authority and power of that fatwa is only determined by however many Muslims respond to it by crying "Allah u Akbar!" and following the guidance it spells out. Otherwise it's meaningless. And that quote from the Marrakesh Declaration shows that there's no shortage of Muslim scholars who don't agree with what ISIS and AQ are preaching.

Another example: The Taliban has preached that girls are not to be educated. Yet there are more women attending university in both Iran and Saudi Arabia--two very conservative Muslim countries--than there are men. And in fact, the Koran has nothing at all to say about education for women (and very little to say about education for men, other than studying the Koran). So who's to rule on whether the Taliban is right or the Saudis and the Iranians are right on the subject? Answer: Whoever has the power to enforce the rules.

It's seeming here like the lone wolf/work place violence crime narrative doesn't hold water. I think it's important to note that you gave examples, but you did not exclude the US.

If dissenting 'Muslin scholars' are not in power at the local mosque, then it doesn't matter if they gather and disagree. They are wrong.

Why aren't 'we', the US, profiling imams and giving them the full procto exam? When a rotten egg is found, shouldn't the doors be shut down and the entire congregation criminally investigated/arrested? Islam is no more a cult than Christianity or Judaism? Individual humans, known as imams, can have the ideology of the taliban and be completely 'right' if they hold power? If not many cults, what are you describing, community organizations?

Seems like the more you claim the bad apple is to blame, the more you demonstrate that the whole, at the minimum locally, is to blame. Maybe, it's the answer to prayers. All shooting and hunting clubs should set up a mosque on site, then we'd always be right.

Larry:

But the "Kill the Jews and the Christians and take their wives and daughters" (parapharased) verses are still in the Koran. When do those verses apply to practicing Muslims? Under what circumances?

I haven't ever seen an explanation.

Zakaria / GPS had a show about peaceful Muslims. Zakaria, at the beginning of the show, threw in some Old Testament verses similar to the ones I posted here. He went on to explain a two part Koran. But it is ordered the exact opposite of the Christian Bible. The first part is the love, peace, feed the poor part. The second part is the "Kill Jews and Christians and take their stuff" part, still paraphrased. That is, the part written later is the violent part. Just the opposite of the Bible, which has the vengeful, stoning, genocidal part at the beginning and then the "peace, turn the other cheek, walk the extra mile" in the later part. Jesus cancelled out the revenging, violent, part of the Old Testaement.

Our Muslim citizens have the same rights as all citizens. To practice their religion, equal protection under the law, freedom of speech, etc...

But the non-citizen Muslims outside our nation's borders have no right to come here. We don't owe them admittance. Until someone can explain to me what circumstances require Muslims to practice the violent part of the Koran I am against bringing in Muslim immigrants, particularly from areas with high ISIS demographics - like Syria.

Edit: Zakaria's show was actually titled "Why Do They Hate Us"

I'm with Mike on this one.

Absent a hierarchical structure, the problem seems to be largely how to tell, at the mosque level, the good imans from the bad. Some of the mosques seem to be refuges even for those self-radicalized off the internet.

So until we have vetted every single practicing iman at every single mosque in NA, and until all those mosques speak relatively as one in condemning violence against non Muslims, against women, against children and against each other, until they accept and find a way to co-exist within our legal structure and as contributors to NA society, I would advocate no more Muslim immigrants.

And I say this as someone who is generally a strong supporter of immigration into my own country. I just feel like we have gone off the rails on what criteria we use and what we ask of immigrants once they arrive on our shores. It's not for us to accommodate immigrants, it is for them to find a way to fit in.

I think there're basically two ways to tell good from bad imams. First, I think the 'intel' has already figured it out, the question is admitting who the bad eggs are that are supposed to be responsible for enforcing existing law. And second, from the congregation's point of view, if the imam hasn't been run off, then they're 'right'. If an imam is overthrown by some law enforcement micro aggression, then the vacuum is filled with similar 'righteousness' by the patrons.

If you read your 'condemnation' criterion, take a look at what's missing. In NA, maybe we should be profiling military aged males. When it comes to humanitarian relief, maybe we should be helping the victims, women and children, not military aged males.

Patriotic US citizens are regularly called on to defend US values on foreign battlefields. Excluding military aged males, those seeking NA values assimilation, would incentivize them to ply their trade for the US' interest in radicalized imam infested areas with colonial ambitions. Of course, that also covers the military aged males that don't want to assimilate. Times they are a changing though, there's indication that there may be a developing class of military aged females.

Craig, just dealing in generalities, not trying to get into the minutia.

I agree, importing military age males is a vastly worse idea than women and children, although look at the Boston marathon bombers' family.

Frankly I don't think men between the ages of 18 and 50 should have been allowed to swarm into Europe as refugees. Let the women and children flee, for the rest, stay and fight to get your homes back.

Irrelevant. What is in Koran doesn't have all that much too do with why they are fighting us and don't like us.

PS. You claim to be a Christian. Perhaps instead of trying to understand other faiths you should read your bible learn to understand it and practice what it preaches.

In case you hadn't noticed that is exactly like the Xtians today. Any meathead can start a "church" and promote any version of the gospel they feel like. And there are hundreds of them some even with enviable TV shows and incomes.

have another day
Dr.WtS

It has everything to do with it.