Should Muslims be upset over Quran burning?

[MobBoss]

I have read both the Bible and the Koran. Both contain passages encouraging and even commanding the killing of nonbelievers.

Do you also take your guitar down to the local Mosque to attend their version of Sunday School?

 

[JollyRoger]

Do you also take your guitar down to the local Mosque to attend their version of Sunday School?

No guitar, but two subsets of Muslim clients (Arab and Persian) that constantly give me referrals from within their community. The only client I had that has ever physically threatened me was of the First Baptist variety (upset that I withdrew as counsel when he stopped paying me).

 

[Squonk]

"Slay them wherever you find them. Drive them out of the places from which they drove you. Idolatry is worse than carnage. . . . f they attack you put them to the sword. Thus shall the unbelievers be rewarded: but if they desist, God is forgiving and merciful. Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme. But if they desist, fight none except the evil-doers"(2:190–93).
(Attack attack attack)

To me this means to kill the idolatrous that attack you, not the idolaters in general. It says If they attack you...

Context is helpful. Perhaps this was a situation of self-defense? (Again, I don't know, I don't know the Qu'ran at all.)

Indeed, context is helpful. But you do not provide it. First, it's "fitna", not "idolatry". Which makes it a bit harder to interpretate.
Anyway, you say it may refer to self-defense. Not quite yes, not quite no. In this case, it refers to Mecca. In another nearby verse Muhammad orders muslims to expel pagans from where pagans expelled muslims, that is Mecca.

Anyway, You left out an important part (. . .). It says:
"And fight them not in Masgid al-Haram, unless they fight you there". And only then follows "but if they attack you, kill them".
This is the context: it is forbidden to fight pagans IN THE MECCAN SANCTUARY. Not in general. Of course, one may make a general rule out of it, in spite of other coranic verses, but one should not pretend this context does not exist. Also, these verses are a bit contradictory. It says one should not fight them, but it does say they should expel them from Mecca and fight until idolatry is no more. That is: Mecca is to be taken, pagan cult is to be surpressed, and pagans perhaps expelled, but should not be harmed unless they offer active resistance.
I believe these verses are instructions muslims got before entering Mecca, as the text fits the historical circumstances. They were entering as a hostile army, but no resistance was offered. That's why Muhammad says that they shouldn't fight unless they are attacked.

"Let the believers not make friends with infidels in preference to the faithful—he that does this has nothing to hope for from God—except in self-defense" (3:28).
"Believers, do not make friends with any but your own people. They will spare no pains to corrupt you. They desire nothing but your ruin. Their hatred is evident from what they utter with their mouths, but greater is the hatred which their breasts conceal" (3:118).
(Infidels are 2nd class)
First of all, what is an infidel? IIRC Muslims believe "Infidel" means someone who is hostile to Islam, not merely someone who doesn't agree with it, in which case that would make sense...

In any case, it says "In preference to the faithful" it doesn't mean you can't associate at all.

The problem is that the "in preference to the faithful" is not present in the arabic original. It says (...) al-awliya' min dun al-muslimin" "let not the believers take infidels as friends not from among the believers", which is a bit repetitive, but simply means: do not take friends from among infidels, not from among believers". The other quote you give makes even more clearer, as it simply says "(...) bitana min dunikum" "do not take as friends (someone) not from among you".

 

[El_Machinae]

So, a 'zinger' I often see is the death penalty for apostasy. No one seems to deny it. How common is it for the Ummah to consider the DP for apostasy to be 'reasonable'?

 

[Formaldehyde]

How reasonable is it to consider the death penalty for merely divulging US government documents which everybody should already have access? How reasonable is any death penalty given that only a handful of countries which are not hopelessly backwards even use it anymore to any extent? How many ex-Christians and ex-Jews have died at the hands of their relatives when they ostensibly renounced their own religion?

 

[Squonk]

How can you equate these? "Considering" a death penalty (yeah, right, as if it was probable) and speculative deaths of christian and jewish apostates with clear religious and state laws in the case of islam? Anyway, even if christans and jews ate their apostates, it wouldn't make death penalty for muslim apostates any more ok.

 

[Formaldehyde]

What would you be willing to do to stop backward Americans from executing completely innocent people now and then?

Why do you feel you have the moral authority to tell others how they must live and act if that is their desire?

What would you say to Muslims who tried to force you to live under Sharia law in your own country?

 

[Squonk]

I do not "tell others how they must live and act". I'm telling them they shouldn't tell others how they must live and act, and to persecute them / kill them if they don't. Unless this behavious is harming others.

 

[Duo]

That's up to Muslims.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I look forward to your subsequent invasion and occupation of the US, Singapore, China, and all the other backward countries with hopelessly provincial laws which openly discriminate against certain groups.

BTW, how's Poland in that regard?

Poland: Official Homophobia Threatens Human Rights

Poland to ban schools from discussing homosexuality

Secret Prisons in Poland and Romania?

Oops. Not so good...

 

[MobBoss]

How reasonable is it to consider the death penalty for merely divulging US government documents which everybody should already have access?

Please show an instance where this is the case? 'Cause if your talking about Manning, the death penalty isnt even in consideration.

How reasonable is any death penalty given that only a handful of countries which are not hopelessly backwards even use it anymore to any extent?

Japan?

How many ex-Christians and ex-Jews have died at the hands of their relatives when they ostensibly renounced their own religion?

In comparison to the Muslim community? Hardly any at all.

What would you be willing to do to stop backward Americans from executing completely innocent people now and then?

Been over this many times and there isnt any absolute proof that this have ever occurred.

 

[Squonk]

That's up to Muslims.

No it isn't. It's not "up to the muslims" if they want to kill apostates, just as it's not "up to christians" if they want to kill gays or whatever.

I look forward to your subsequent invasion and occupation of the US, Singapore, China, and all the other backward countries with hopelessly provincial laws which openly discriminate against certain groups.

BTW, how's Poland in that regard?

Poland: Official Homophobia Threatens Human Rights

Poland to ban schools from discussing homosexuality

Secret Prisons in Poland and Romania?

Oops. Not so good...

First, as I've mentioned, the "others are bad too" tactic is, uh, seriously flawed and not very convincing. That's no excuse. Even if Poles actually burned gays on stakes, that would be no "excuse" for muslims killing apostates or UN workers. Just as such killings would be no excuse for killing gays, killing muslims etc.
Moreover, being a gay in Poland, I do not believe that situation of gays here is dramatic. League of Polish Families and All-Polish Youth faded away completely, and J. Kaczynski is reviled by majority of society. Two people mentioned by name in one of your links, J. Kochanowski and L. Kaczynski, are dead. So your link discusses views of dead people and political entities that in reality do not exist anymore.Of course, a lot is to be changed, a lot, but it's ages ahead almost every muslim country in this matter.
When it comes to secret prisons, it's not sure if they existed at all, and if they did, USA is responsible for what was happening there, not Poland.

 

[kochman]

Dancing like this?
Iranian reaction:

Spoiler :

In fact, have a look at the whole page to see how the Middle East reacted to 9/11:
http://groups.colgate.edu/aarislam/response.htm

Uh... I've seen enough Death to America protests in Iran to last me a life time.
That country definitely has a lot of good people in it, who are totally and utterly oppressed by an Islamic theocracy, applying sharia law.

 

[Formaldehyde]

First, as I've mentioned, the "others are bad too" tactic is, uh, seriously flawed and not very convincing. That's no excuse. Even if Poles actually burned gays on stakes, that would be no "excuse" for muslims killing apostates or UN workers. Just as such killings would be no excuse for killing gays, killing muslims etc.

You are absolutely right. It is no excuse. But I can't very well consider your insistence on forcing everybody else to live as you wish them to in their own country when your own country does such a deplorable job of it.

When it comes to secret prisons, it's not sure if they existed at all, and if they did, USA is responsible for what was happening there, not Poland.

I would say violating international law, and likely your own country's laws, is more than sufficient reason to arrest your leaders for crimes against humanity, as GWB and his cronies should be as well.

Since you feel the need to force everybody else in other countries to live up to modern standards, I'm sure you can appreciate that.

Uh... I've seen enough Death to America protests in Iran to last me a life time.

Perhaps we should have never overthrown their sovereign democratic government. Then perhaps they wouldn't rightly hate the American government so much.

That country definitely has a lot of good people in it, who are totally and utterly oppressed by an Islamic theocracy, applying sharia law.

They decided to to that only after we imposed a brutal fascist puppet regime on their country. Perhaps someday they can once again have a democratic government, that is when the majority of Iranians actually want one...

 

[civ_king]

Formaldehyde, I wasn't aware stupidity was a crime against humanity

 

[Dreadnought]

Formaldehyde, I wasn't aware stupidity was a crime against humanity

He's lucky it isn't.

In between games, will post a more meaningful post afterwards.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Formaldehyde, I wasn't aware stupidity was a crime against humanity

In this particular case it is both. They were quite stupid to openly violate international law, as GWB and his cronies were.

I think that list of people who should be arrested if they step into Switzerland and other countries should grow considerably to include all who took part. I certainly have no problem adding the leaders of "coalition" countries which aided in the torture and murder of innocent people.

 

[Thoughtful Thug]

Have there ever been a case of today that consist of Muslims burning bibles in a predominate Muslim country, and then Christians retaliate by going about in a murderous rage and killing off Muslims in the West?

Of course not. But it is not because it is about which faith is more benevolent than the other, or anything like that. It is just another series of problems of the lack of law and order that can be imposed on citizens living in Afganistan.

 

[r16]

as a not very seriously practising Muslim ı would say the burning was internal US politics , although that might have been already noted . In the woods , it is political necessity to be mad at the West at such times , or you will lose your base to other zealots .

 

[civ_king]

as a not very seriously practising Muslim ı would say the burning was internal US politics , although that might have been already noted . In the woods , it is political necessity to be mad at the West at such times , or you will lose your base to other zealots .

Why are you using dotless i's for part of your post