Moody,

You can keep hopping but the fact is that I have shown you two pieces of hard data that marriage between cousins leads to real genetic defects. Data from UK and data from a study in Pakistan. There are studies available from Egypt, Saudi Arabia and India as well. You can go into denial as you have but that does not change the facts.

Look at the list you post. Allah could have said do not marry first cousins. He could have said do not marry cousins generation after generation. He does neither. You are adding the statement (preferably) on your own; nothing in the quran or the hadiath.

oopht. truth hurts.

so thank you ibrahim, arif, akafir and others. i read here and i like to share posts here with my friends. keep speaking the truth.

Ibrahim Mahfooz: Looks like you are no longer Mahfooz, You are the Cursed one!!!

Moody:
Your mentor, Naik, aka Mr. “F” uses Quran 79;30 to show that the earth is egg-shaped and thereby ‘prove’ that "the Creator wrote it". He translates the Arab word ‘Dahaha’ as egg-shaped, while all the Arabic dictionaries translate it as “extended”. In Quran translated by Abdullah Yousif the above verse reads
“And the earth, moreover
He extended”

You and your mentor further use Quran 39:5 which states”
“He makes the Night
Overlap the Day, and the Day
Overlap the night”
As another evidence of the spherical shape of the Earth.

Are you smart enough to see how ridiculous is this argument?
The fact that your Quran commands you to face Mecca during prayer is alone a conclusive proof that its author believes the earth to be flat.

You further claim that the Quran knew before anyone else that ”all living things are made of water”. Hogwash! Water is made of Oxygen and Hydrogen only while bodies of living organisms have at least 112 different elements in the form of compounds minerals.

These are enough examples for the time being. You too can go back to my earlier post that shows how miraculous your Quran is.

There are 50 plus predominantly Muslim countries scattered around the planet and the only other thing they have in common besides their religion is their utter backwardness in all of life’s facets; economical, social, industrial, financial, military, educational ,etc. If the Quran knew of important physical facts before the rest of the world why the Muslims did not use them to improve the living conditions of their societies. Ask your Mr. “F” to discuss the connection between your belief system and your sorry state of affairs than try prove the "miracles" in your Book. That will be much more productive.

Those of us who belong to former colonies think of imperialism as rape. So you rape. Then you kill. Then you demand the right to rape the corpse. That's usually known as necrophilia. Extending this horrible analogy, Richard Perle said recently, "Iraqis are freer today and we are safer. Relax and enjoy it." A few days into the war, the news anchor Tom Brokaw said: "One of the things we don't want to do...is to destroy the infrastructure of Iraq because in a few days we're going to own that country." Now the ownership deeds are being signed. Iraq is no longer a country. It's an asset.

It's no longer ruled. It's owned. And it is owned for the most part by Bechtel. Maybe Halliburton and a British company or two will get a few bones.

Our battle has to be against both the occupiers and the new owners of Iraq.

FOR GENERAL INFORMATION:

In Islam you cannot have out side marital sexual relations WHICH MOST OF THE MUSLIM POPULATION FOLLOW AND PRACTICE.

And YOU (Muslim) CANNOT MARRY:

1- YOur or your wife's mother or step mothers or grand mothers, step grand mothers OR fathers.
2- Your sister or step sister.
3- Your brother or step brother.
4- Your wife’s sister or step sister until you are married to her or until she is alive.
5- Your daughter and son OR your brothers or sisters daughter and son, including all step.
6-Your father's and mother’s, brothers or sisters including steps and there wife’s and husbands and there parents.

But you are allowed to marry there children (your cousin) ONLY PREFERABLE for first generation and MORE PREFERABLE is to marry out side family.
(Scientifically proven that first generation marriage doesn't cause any harm, but there is a possibility of less then 1/1000 of physical harm, if you continue keep marrying with cousin’s generation after generation.)

Malayalavedhi.com Discussion Board - Democracy-A discussion ...Here is a video on the discussion between Arundhathi Roy and Prof. Howard Zinn on Democracy telecasted by C-Span in 2003. This discussion was soon after ...
www.malayalavedhi.com/wbboard/thread.php?threadid=4768&

A. Kafir,

Since you also referred to Britain.
I personally observer more frequent physically and mentally retarded people in U.K where every I went there, compare to my Muslim country which is even with much bigger population. I don't see such humongous proportion all over in my country that you find some body every where you go.

WHY is it so? You don't marry your cousins or INFACT you hardly get married?

OR

Is it the result of multiple promiscuity or shame free counting free sexual encounters in your general public practice???

{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}}}{}}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}}
USA!! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA!!
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
STOP THE WAR STOP THE WAR!!
{}{}{}{}}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}}{}{}{}{}
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!!!
[][][][][]][][]][]][]]][]][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
PEACE, PAZ, SALAAM, SHOLOM:........______________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton МИР,평화, 和平:

Today is 211!
So It's 211!

1996, Madeleine Albright, then the US secretary of state, was asked on national television what she felt about the fact that 500,000 Iraqi children had died as a result of US economic sanctions. She replied that it was "a very hard choice", but that, all things considered, "we think the price is worth it". Albright never lost her job for saying this. She continued to travel the world representing the views and aspirations of the US government. More pertinently, the sanctions against Iraq remained in place. Children continued to die

A. Kafir,

So to prove your intelligence you are DEPENDENT on one odd cities, odd doctors random states in some EXCITING for you news to make SOME CONCLUSION?

And thats how you make your SCIENTIFIC claims and PROVE the high limits of your intelligece.

I have nothing further to prove then my original reply against this question.

SO YOU IN YOUR DULL MIND TRYING TO CLAIM IT IS SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN AS A ..... FACT? or just a theory??

Go and keep hopping grass!

1.6 Billion Muslims are not IMPRESSED by your kinds INVENTIVE EVERY DAY POPING SENSATIONAL NEWS.

Moody writes: "A. Kafir,

So you are telling that 44% of Pakistani children are physically ill. Go and check with some mental doctor your mental and physical health FIRST."

Moody, there is a cure for wilful ignorance, and it is to atleast attempt to read.

I provided you a link to a pakistani newspaper. Here it is again:
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008%5C02%5C01%5Cstory_1-2-2008_pg7_19

The study does not say that 44% of pakistani kids are physically ill, but as the article states: "Marriages between cousins is a major reason for around 44 percent thalassaemia children registered in the city, a study conducted by the University of Health Sciences (UHS) reveals".

The fact remains that marriag between cousins among the muslims is a major source of genetic problems and Allah did not seem to know this simple genetics.

Moody, your Allah is dumb. Why?

A. Kafir wrote: “...Why don't you answer why is it that your Allah is so dumb that he did not tell his followers not to marry first cousins?”
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Don't forget that Lot of the Old Testament had kids by his daughters. God approved.

“The Muslim practice is similar to older Middle Eastern norms, such as those outlined in Leviticus in the Old Testament. The lineage of the Hebrew Patriarchs who founded the Jewish people was highly inbred. Abraham said his wife Sarah was also his half-sister. His son Isaac married Rebekah, a cousin once removed. And Isaac's son Jacob wed his two first cousins, Leah and Rachel.

Jacob's dozen sons were the famous progenitors of the Twelve Tribes of Israel. Due to inbreeding, Jacob's eight legitimate sons had only six unique great-grandparents instead of the usual eight. That's because the inbred are related to their relatives through multiple paths.”
http://www.isteve.com/cousin_marriage_conundrum.htm

Ibrahim Mahfouz:

I'm not visiting this blog to teach and rectify you on every thing. Try to put YOUR SELF atleast some DUMB effort, if you could. THOUGH I can see through your posts there is less chance even that effort will reduce any bigotry. All your stupid questions are by chance also answered at IRF link I have given below.

A. Kafir,

So you are telling that 44% of Pakistani children are physically ill. Go and check with some mental doctor your mental and physical health FIRST.

ATLEAST I CAN'T SEE ANY POSSIBLE CURE OF YOUR HUMOROUS LYING AND BIGOTRY. And now I also have doubtes about your mental health.

Seems like no logic, science or reason can affect Coptic dumbness & stubbornness.

Holy Bible writes (twice):
"A. KAFIR,

The holy Scriptures say this about you and your prophet.

"Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also. (1 John 2:22-23)."

Who is my prophet?

Once again, every interfaith group session should begin with the historic flaws of the major religions. By doing this, there would only be one faith left i.e. Reality ( And the Necessary Thumping Thereof):

Once again as a counter to the milleniums of religious mumbo jumbo :

1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was probably an embellishment of the lives of three different men or a mythical character as was Moses, the "Tablet-Man" who talked to burning bushes and made much magic in Egypt.

1.5 million Conservative Jews and their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT. http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm

2. Jesus, the illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter possibly suffering from hallucinations, has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".

3. Mohammed, an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

This agenda continues as shown by the assassination of Bhutto, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”.

And who funds these acts of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

4. Luther, Calvin, Joe Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingy talking flying fictional thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

5. Hinduism (from an online Hindu site) - "Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centered and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’."

The caste/laborer system and cow worship are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism."

6. Buddhism- "Buddhism began in India about 500 years before the birth of Christ. The people living at that time had become disillusioned with certain beliefs of Hinduism including the caste system, which had grown extremely complex. The number of outcasts (those who did not belong to any particular caste) was continuing to grow."
"However, in Buddhism, like so many other religions, fanciful stories arose concerning events in the life of the founder, Siddhartha Gautama (fifth century B.C.):"

Archaeological discoveries have proved, beyond a doubt, his historical character, but apart from the legends we know very little about the circumstances of his life. e.g. Buddha by one legend was supposedly talking when he came out of his mother's womb.

Bottom line: There are many good ways of living but be aware of the hallucinations, embellishments, lies and myths surrounding the founders and foundations of said rules of life.

A. KAFIR,

The holy Scriptures say this about you and your prophet.

"Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also. (1 John 2:22-23).

http://www.astronomy2009.org/
FRM CONEY ISLAND NEW YORK
USA! USA! USA! USA! USA USA!!
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!
STOP THE WAR STOP THE WAR
VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE !!
USA! USA! USA! USA! USA USA!
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!
VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE!!
STOP THE WAR STOP THE WAR
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!
USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA!
VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE!!
STOP THE WAR STOP THE WAR
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!.....__________________
PEACE,PAZ,SALAAM,SHOLOM,FREIDEN,МИР,평화, 和平:

More off topic-

Watch the video on the link page. Tariq Ramadan plays the Islamophobe card near the end.

"For those interested in the current upset over the Archbishop of Canterbury's Sharia law comments:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/default.stm

How do you solve a Problem like Shari'ah?

He must resign.."

Another BBC story:

"A decapitated body found behind a row of shops in north London has been identified as Lakhdar Ouyahia.
Mr Ouyahia, who was 43 and an Algerian national, was found wrapped in a blood-stained duvet in a supermarket goods cage in Kilburn.

Detectives investigating the case have also confirmed that they have found Mr Ouyahia's head in a canal nearby.

Mohamed Boudjenane, 45, of Kingsgate Road, Kilburn, is due to appear in court on Monday charged with murder."

Wonder what Law he broke??

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/7237207.stm

Wow, that's a lot of off-topic posts, as usual.

Probably underscores the need for those interfaith youth programs, though.

Especially where the adults of certain major religions can't seem to do anything but hostile advertising and attacking.

This is the exact reason kids should be given the opportunity to teach themselves and each other how to get along, instead of having our schools turned into recruiting grounds for those who claim 'My way is the only way and it's very important to be hostile to all others.'

This *is* a diverse society, and if some of we 'adults' can't get behind that, then it's time for those to get out of the way.

We can all do better.

blessed are the cheesemakers, and other manufacturers of dairy products. Cursed are the lactose-intolerant, for they shall not partake of the blessings of the cheesemakers.

None are so blind as those who will not see.

(Fred, 31:34)

You just gotta love it when the christian freaks and the muslim freaks start throwing crap at each other, each claiming the Big Pure Truth.

It's reassuring to see how widespread the insanity is among our species. When you nuts decide to kill each other off, do you think you might take your disease with you?

PS.

Jewish tradition (some verified through the historian Flavius Josephus) holds that the Apostles Paul and Peter among many others were tortured and crucified.

On the sermon on the mount Jesus said: "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.

Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is yor reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you."

Mathew 5:8-12

Anonymous:

Is any form of suffering more palatable than another?

Is the suffering of one person more important than another's?

If you only care about the suffering of those just like you then youn don't get it, the Spirit is not strong in you, and you don't know Jesus like you think you do.

We should try to stop ALL suffering we see.

Moody:
Re: Creator the Author of Quran
You quote from Naik some scientific phenomena to prove that the Quran was written by Allah. Why didn't you and he mention the many other wrong phenomena and the even more internal contradictions as well as historical mistakes and contradictions? Below are just a sample.

18:86
Until when he reached
The setting of the sun,
He found it set
In a spring of murky water:
Translation: The sun sets in a well with hot mud.
31:10
He created the heavens
Without any pillars that ye
Can see; He set
On the earth mountains
Standing firm, lest it
Should shake with you;
Translation: The mountains are put there to anchor the earth so it would not move.
23 :12-14
Then We did create
From a quintessence(of clay)
Then We placed him
As(a drop of) semen
In a place of rest,
Firmly fixed;
Then We made the semen
Into a clot of congealed blood;
Then of that clot We made
A lump; then We
Made out of that lump
Bones and clothed the bones
With flesh; then We developed
Out of it another creature.
Translation: The semen became a clot of blood, then a lump and the lump became a skeleton and after that the skeleton was clothed with flesh. Have you ever heard of a woman aborting a skeleton?
These are supposedly the explanation given by the Creator on some natural phenomena. It does not sound to me to be anymore scientific than would be expected of a 7th Century desert dweller.

CONEY ISLAND NEW YORK YA!
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN!-.....______________
Better a CLINTON than a McCAIN! Thank You HUMATE

Moody,

44% of the kids in the pakistani study does not arise from 1/1000 of the chance.

Why don't you answer why is it that your Allah is so dumb that he did not tell his followers not to marry first cousins?

Moody, Moody, Moody,
Again:

All of your copying and pasting from severely flawed pro-Muslim website, simply reinforces the following:

Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab who also had embellishing/ hallucinating/ plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

This agenda continues as shown by the assassination of Bhutto, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”.

And who funds these acts of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

(This is a follow-up on the (raised in the USA)Muslim woman in Saudi who was arrested, strip searched and told she was going to hell for have coffee with her co-worker at Starbucks.)

--The National Society for Human Rights (NSHR), Saudi Arabia’s non-governmental rights body, will address the Governorate of Riyadh regarding Yara, a 36-year-old Jeddah-based businesswoman who was apprehended by the religious police and thrown in Al-Malaz Prison on Monday.

Yara said she endured a humiliating and frightening hours-long ordeal that began with her arrest by a member of the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice for having coffee with an unrelated man in a Starbucks cafe in Riyadh.

“We have visited Yara at home and took her official complaint,” NSHR member Al-Jawhara Al-Angari told Arab News yesterday. “The complaint will be sent to the main office in Riyadh where further notices from our part will be added. It will then be sent to the Governorate of Riyadh.”

Yara says she was forced to fingerprint two confessions and was strip-searched in the prison. She also said she was produced before a “legal sheikh” who sat behind a one-way glass window and told her she would go to hell for the moral crimes she had committed.

The incident occurred on the same day that Yakin Ertürk, the special rapporteur of the United Nations Human Rights Council on Violence Against Women, arrived in the Kingdom on a 10-day visit.

A member of the religious police apprehended Yara for the moral crime of “khulwa” (a state of seclusion with an unrelated man). The woman’s colleague, a Syrian financial analyst, was also arrested and released the following day.

According to Al-Angari, several serious violations of human rights were apparent in this case. “First of all, Yara was not in a state of khulwa,” said Al-Angari. “She was in a public place where people were all around them,” said Al-Angari.

Yara told the NSHR that the commission member who arrested her was not accompanied by a police officer and that he didn’t provide any documentation, or even his name. He also prevented her from contacting relatives.

“She had relatives in Riyadh at the time whom she could have contacted,” said Al-Angari. “A relative should have come to be with her when she was being taken somewhere.”

After the commission member forced Yara to go with him in a taxi, she said that she was placed in a GMC parked in front of a local commission center.

This, said Al-Angari, is a direct violation of an Interior Ministry order that commission members are not to hold suspects but rather turn them over to proper authorities for investigation.

“The confiscation of her mobile and the refusal of the commission member to allow her to contact her husband or any other relative to come to her rescue was another violation,” Al-Angari said.

Another human rights violation was forcing Yara to fingerprint a confession under duress.

Having grown up in the US, Yara’s Arabic language skills are insufficient to have been able to comprehend what was written on the document she was compelled to sign.

“She cannot read Arabic,” Al-Angari said. “The commission member should have read to her what she was going to fingerprint. She had no idea what she was fingerprinting. She obliged in a state of panic.”

The NSHR official described the manner in which Yara was strip-searched in prison as “inhuman”.

“It was degrading to her, both mentally and physically. The fact that she was asked to remove her clothes like that implied she was a criminal,” she said.

The NSHR member said the rights body would urge the Governorate of Riyadh to drop all fingerprinted confession papers from Yara’s public file.

“We also will take note of the violations that had occurred in this case and notify the governorate about them. We further will ask that Yara be compensated for the damages she sustained,” she said. However, Yara’s case is not the first of its reported kind in the Kingdom. In 2003, the religious police apprehended a British woman in the capital from the Kingdom Center on the charge of “not covering up sufficiently” in public. The woman was forced to get into a taxi by a commission member. She was taken to one of their centers.

She later narrated to Arab News how three men grabbed her from behind and forced her to fingerprint a document in Arabic. She was then thrown in Al-Malaz Prison in a similar manner. Even though she was released at the intervention of the embassy, the woman suffered from serious psychological repercussions. Her husband told Arab News at that time that she refused to take off her abaya (the body veil) inside their house for three weeks after the incident. The couple eventually left the Kingdom.

http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=106645&d=10&m=2&y=2008

Moody:
You claim that Islam means peace in Arabic. That is false. Islam means "submission", while the term Salam means "peace". We should not be surprised because Taqiyah in your cult makes it halal or allowable to lie in order to advance your cause. Another Arabic word you need to know is 'Naik" which is the last name of the nutcase you are quoting. It is the Arabic "F" word, which, I suppose, is appropriate.

A. Kafir:

Your below words which I do not said referring towards me CLEARLY prove your lying intensions:

“first cousin marriages generation after generation do not lead to severe genetic disease"

Instead I said,

Scientifically proven that "first generation" marriage doesn't cause any harm,

But there is a possibility of less then 1/1000 of physical harm, if you continue keep marrying with cousins generation to generation.

To verify type genetics and Google your self. IF which I doubt would help to release you from your excruciating pain.

GO AHEAD KEEP LYING & TWISTING OTHERS STATEMENTS TO MAKE YOUR POINT!!!!

Moody writes: "But you can marry there children only preferable for first generation and more preferable is to marry out side family.(Scientifically proven that first generation marriage doesn't cause any harm, but there is a possibility of less then 1/1000 of physical harm, if you continue keep marrying with cousins generation to generation.)"

Nonsense. Scientifically? And your authority is Zaker the Quacker the nut job from Mumbai? LoL!! Moody, let us see your scientific references which back up your claim. You are just about as ignorant as you dumb Allah when it comes to genetics.

Moody,

Why don't you tell all the medical scientist that modern day genetics is totally wrong, and first cousin marriages generation after generation do not lead to severe genetic disease. Phil Woolas, the UK minister seems to be quoting statistics UK government collects to show that 1/3 of the genetics disease in UK comes from 3% of the pakistani muslim population that practices first cousin marriages. Those are the facts. No one is saying that others do not have genetics disease. Humans will always have it ... that is genetics but people do not marry close relatives because they know it increase the chances of problems.

You did not answer the question: How come your allah had no clue about that simple gentics science? Indian muslims suffer from the same problem as the muslims of pakistan.

**********************
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008%5C02%5C01%5Cstory_1-2-2008_pg7_19

LAHORE: Marriages between cousins is a major reason for around 44 percent thalassaemia children registered in the city, a study conducted by the University of Health Sciences (UHS) reveals.

Prof Dr Muhammad Aslam Khan, the head of the UHS Human Genetics and Biotechnology Department, conducted a study on cultural consanguinity in Punjab and highlighted the hazards of marriages between cousins and blood relatives.

Dr Khan told Daily Times that he had interviewed 206 families in Lahore and found that 89 percent parents were knotted in consanguinity marriages. He said he had found one or more thalassaemia cases in the families where cousin marriages were common. The 206 families had given birth to 720 children, out of which 318 children were inflicted with thalassaemia and 402 were found healthy. He said that out of those 318 thalassaemia patients, 174 were males and 144 were females. Out of the 420 healthy children, 209 were boys and 195 were girls, he added.
********************************

Moody, if you are from India, look up the genetic illness among the indian muslims. It far outstrips the kafirs of india. All because of the stupidity of Allah!!!

Really, how come your Allah did not see the problem with cousin marriages?

Moody, Moody, Moody,

All of your copying and pasting from severely flawed pro-Muslim website, simply reinforces the following:

. Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven,warmongering, hallucinating Arab who also had embellishing/ hallucinating/ plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

This agenda continues as shown by the assassination of Bhutto, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”.

And who funds these acts of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

A. Kafir,

I have been in Britain and genetic illness there is a general phenomena and not JUST the muslim one.

I personlly have seen all kind of NON MUSLIM genetically ill super white race(ist).

Also include step and fathers where ever it is missing.

WITH CORRECTIONS:

A. Kafir,

In Islam you cannot have out side marital sexual relations and you CANNOT MARRY:

1- Your or your wife's mother or step mothers or grand mothers, step grand mothers.
2- Your sister or step sister.
3- Your brother or step brothers.
4- Your wife’s sister or step sister until you are married to her or until she is alive.
5- Your daughter and son OR your brothers or sisters daughter and son, including all step.
6-Your father's brothers or sisters including steps and there wife’s and husbands. But you can marry there children only preferable for first generation and more preferable is to marry out side family.(Scientifically proven that first generation marriage doesn't cause any harm, but there is a possibility of less then 1/1000 of physical harm, if you continue keep marrying with cousins generation to generation.)
7-Your mothers brothers and sisters including steps and there wife’s and husbands. But you can marry there children only preferable for first generation and more preferable is to marry out side family.(Scientifically proven that first generation marriage doesn't cause any harm, but there is a possibility of less then 1/1000 of physical harm, if you continue keep marrying with cousins generation to generation.)

And one thing I missed,

- You cannot marry your brother or step brother as well.

A. Kafir,

In Islam you cannot have out side marital sexual relations and you CANNOT MARRY:

1- Your or your wife's mother or step mothers or grand mothers, step grand mothers.
2- YOur sister or step sister.
3- Your wifes sister or step sister until you are married to her or until she is alive.
4- Your daughter OR your brothers or sisters daughter.
5-Your father's brothers or sisters including steps and there wifes and husbands. But you can marry there childern only perferabe for first generation and more preferable is to marry out side family.(Scientifically proven that first generation marriage doesn't cause any harm, but there is a possibility of less then 1/1000 of physical harm, if you continue keep marrying with cousins generation to generation.)
6-Your mothers brothers and sisters including steps and there wifes and husbands.But you can marry there childern only perferabe for first generation and more preferable is to marry out side family.(Scientifically proven that first generation marriage doesn't cause any harm, but there is a possibility of less then 1/1000 of physical harm, if you continue keep marrying with cousins generation to generation.)

VOTE: For,

((((( H*i*L*L*A*R*Y ----- CLINTON For 1st Woman PREZ 2009 & Bill for 1st MAN Yea! )))))))))

DOWN with OPRAH WINFREY’s ‘THE SECRET-ARMY.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Secret_(2006_film)

Please see How & Why Oprah's Prez hopefull, with NO-EXPERIENCE or extremely insignicant, Mr. wanabe Prez OBAMA, and more.

Please See Scientology for Comparison. Thanks.

((((( H*i*L*L*A*R*Y ----- CLINTON For 1st Woman PREZ 2009 & Bill for 1st MAN Yea! )))))))))

All possible kind of questions asked by non muslims about Islam answered on below web site:
http://www.irf.net/irf/faqonislam/index.htm

PROVING THE EXISTENCE OF ALLAH (SWT)TO AN ATHEIST
by Dr. Zakir Naik

CONGRATULATING AN ATHEIST

Normally, when I meet an atheist, the first thing I like to do is to congratulate him and say, " My special congratulations to you", because most of the people who believe in God are doing blind belief - he is a Christian, because his father is a Christian; he is a Hindu, because his father is a Hindu; the majority of the people in the world are blindly following the religion of their fathers. An atheist, on the other hand, even though he may belong to a religious family, uses his intellect to deny the existence of God; what ever concept or qualities of God he may have learnt in his religion may not seem to be logical to him.

My Muslim brothers may question me, "Zakir, why are you congratulating an atheist?" The reason that I am congratulating an atheist is because he agrees with the first part of the Shahada i.e. the Islamic Creed, ‘La ilaaha’ - meaning ‘there is no God’. So half my job is already done; now the only part left is ‘il lallah’ i.e. ‘BUT ALLAH’ which I shall do Insha Allah. With others (who are not atheists) I have to first remove from their minds the wrong concept of God they may have and then put the correct concept of one true God.

LOGICAL CONCEPT OF GOD

My first question to the atheist will be: "What is the definition of God?" For a person to say there is no God, he should know what is the meaning of God. If I hold a book and say that ‘this is a pen’, for the opposite person to say, ‘it is not a pen’, he should know what is the definition of a pen, even if he does not know nor is able to recognise or identify the object I am holding in my hand. For him to say this is not a pen, he should at least know what a pen means. Similarly for an atheist to say ‘there is no God’, he should at least know the concept of God. His concept of God would be derived from the surroundings in which he lives. The god that a large number of people worship has got human qualities - therefore he does not believe in such a god. Similarly a Muslim too does not and should not believe in such false gods.

If a non-Muslim believes that Islam is a merciless religion with something to do with terrorism; a religion which does not give rights to women; a religion which contradicts science; in his limited sense that non-Muslim is correct to reject such Islam. The problem is he has a wrong picture of Islam. Even I reject such a false picture of Islam, but at the same time, it becomes my duty as a Muslim to present the correct picture of Islam to that non-Muslim i.e. Islam is a merciful religion, it gives equal rights to the women, it is not incompatible with logic, reason and science; if I present the correct facts about Islam, that non-Muslim may Inshallah accept Islam.

Similarly the atheist rejects the false gods and the duty of every Muslim is to present the correct concept of God which he shall Insha Allah not refuse.

(You may refer to my article, ‘Concept of God in Islam’, for more details)

QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE

The methods of proving the existence of God with usage of the material provided in the ‘Concept of God in Islam’ to an atheist may satisfy some but not all.

Many atheists demand a scientific proof for the existence of God. I agree that today is the age of science and technology. Let us use scientific knowledge to kill two birds with one stone, i.e. to prove the existence of God and simultaneously prove that the Qur’an is a revelation of God.

If a new object or a machine, which no one in the world has ever seen or heard of before, is shown to an atheist or any person and then a question is asked, " Who is the first person who will be able to provide details of the mechanism of this unknown object? After little bit of thinking, he will reply, ‘the creator of that object.’ Some may say ‘the producer’ while others may say ‘the manufacturer.’ What ever answer the person gives, keep it in your mind, the answer will always be either the creator, the producer, the manufacturer or some what of the same meaning, i.e. the person who has made it or created it. Don’t grapple with words, whatever answer he gives, the meaning will be same, therefore accept it.

SCIENTIFIC FACTS MENTIONED IN THE QUR’AN: for details on this subject please refer to my book, ‘THE QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE – COMPATIBLE OR INCOMPATIBLE?

THEORY OF PROBABILITY

In mathematics there is a theory known as ‘Theory of Probability’. If you have two options, out of which one is right, and one is wrong, the chances that you will chose the right one is half, i.e. one out of the two will be correct. You have 50% chances of being correct. Similarly if you toss a coin the chances that your guess will be correct is 50% (1 out of 2) i.e. 1/2. If you toss a coin the second time, the chances that you will be correct in the second toss is again 50% i.e. half. But the chances that you will be correct in both the tosses is half multiplied by half (1/2 x 1/2) which is equal to 1/4 i.e. 50% of 50% which is equal to 25%. If you toss a coin the third time, chances that you will be correct all three times is (1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2) that is 1/8 or 50% of 50% of 50% that is 12½%.

A dice has got six sides. If you throw a dice and guess any number between 1 to 6, the chances that your guess will be correct is 1/6. If you throw the dice the second time, the chances that your guess will be correct in both the throws is (1/6 x 1/6) which is equal to 1/36. If you throw the dice the third time, the chances that all your three guesses are correct is (1/6 x 1/6 x 1/6) is equal to 1/216 that is less than 0.5 %.

Let us apply this theory of probability to the Qur’an, and assume that a person has guessed all the information that is mentioned in the Qur’an which was unknown at that time. Let us discuss the probability of all the guesses being simultaneously correct.

At the time when the Qur’an was revealed, people thought the world was flat, there are several other options for the shape of the earth. It could be triangular, it could be quadrangular, pentagonal, hexagonal, heptagonal, octagonal, spherical, etc. Lets assume there are about 30 different options for the shape of the earth. The Qur’an rightly says it is spherical, if it was a guess the chances of the guess being correct is 1/30.

The light of the moon can be its own light or a reflected light. The Qur’an rightly says it is a reflected light. If it is a guess, the chances that it will be correct is 1/2 and the probability that both the guesses i.e the earth is spherical and the light of the moon is reflected light is 1/30 x 1/2 = 1/60.

Further, the Qur’an also mentions every living thing is made of water. Every living thing can be made up of either wood, stone, copper, aluminum, steel, silver, gold, oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen, oil, water, cement, concrete, etc. The options are say about 10,000. The Qur’an rightly says that everything is made up of water. If it is a guess, the chances that it will be correct is 1/10,000 and the probability of all the three guesses i.e. the earth is spherical, light of moon is reflected light and everything is created from water being correct is 1/30 x 1/2 x 1/10,000 = 1/60,000 which is equal to about .0017%.

The Qur’an speaks about hundreds of things that were not known to men at the time of its revelation. Only in three options the result is .0017%. I leave it upto you, to work out the probability if all the hundreds of the unknown facts were guesses, the chances of all of them being correct guesses simultaneously and there being not a single wrong guess. It is beyond human capacity to make all correct guesses without a single mistake, which itself is sufficient to prove to a logical person that the origin of the Qur’an is Divine.

CREATOR IS THE AUTHOR OF THE QUR’AN

The only logical answer to the question as to who could have mentioned all these scientific facts 1400 years ago before they were discovered, is exactly the same answer initially given by the atheist or any person, to the question who will be the first person who will be able to tell the mechanism of the unknown object. It is the ‘CREATOR’, the producer, the Manufacturer of the whole universe and its contents. In the English language He is ‘God’, or more appropriate in the Arabic language, ‘ALLAH’.

QUR’AN IS A BOOK OF SIGNS AND NOT SCIENCE

Let me remind you that the Qur’an is not a book of Science, ‘S-C-I-E-N-C-E’ but a book of Signs ‘S-I-G-N-S’ i.e. a book of ayaats. The Qur’an contains more than 6,000 ayaats, i.e. ‘signs’, out of which more than a thousand speak about Science. I am not trying to prove that the Qur’an is the word of God using scientific knowledge as a yard stick because any yardstick is supposed to be more superior than what is being checked or verified. For us Muslims the Qur’an is the Furqan i.e. criteria to judge right from wrong and the ultimate yardstick which is more superior to scientific knowledge.

But for an educated man who is an atheist, scientific knowledge is the ultimate test which he believes in. We do know that science many a times takes ‘U’ turns, therefore I have restricted the examples only to scientific facts which have sufficient proof and evidence and not scientific theories based on assumptions. Using the ultimate yardstick of the atheist, I am trying to prove to him that the Qur’an is the word of God and it contains the scientific knowledge which is his yardstick which was discovered recently, while the Qur’an was revealed 1400 year ago. At the end of the discussion, we both come to the same conclusion that God though superior to science, is not incompatible with it.

SCIENCE IS ELIMINATING MODELS OF GOD BUT NOT GOD

Francis Bacon, the famous philosopher, has rightly said that a little knowledge of science makes man an atheist, but an in-depth study of science makes him a believer in God. Scientists today are eliminating models of God, but they are not eliminating God. If you translate this into Arabic, it is La illaha illal la, There is no god, (god with a small ‘g’ that is fake god) but God (with a capital ‘G’).

Surah Fussilat:

"Soon We will show them our signs in the (farthest) regions (of the earth), and in their own souls, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that thy Lord doth witness all things?"

[Al-Quran 41:53]

Moody,

What does Zakir have to say about the devastating practice of marrying first cousins in Islam?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3342040.ece

"A government minister has warned that inbreeding among immigrants is causing a surge in birth defects - comments likely to spark a new row over the place of Muslims in British society.
.......
Medical research suggests that while British Pakistanis are responsible for 3% of all births, they account for one in three British children born with genetic illnesses."

Allah tells you that you can marry first cousins in the Quran. How come Allah did not know basic Genetics? Ever wondered about that?

How many generations of inbreeding do you have behind you?

Moody,

LoL!! Good stuff to post from Zakir Naik's website. That tells the Kafirs a bit more about Eboo's background as well. Zakir hails from the same country and a very similar background as Eboo. They can compare and see for themselves what Eboo is really trying to say when they read Zakir's website.

Moody:
Re Hijab and homosexuality in Islam

Below is the historical root for the "veil" in Islam:
In the book Sahih Bukhari on the chapter of "Ablution" and the topic of "Defecating Women", it states that the wives of the Prophet used to go out at night to defecate in a clearing just outside the neighborhood. Omar ibn Khattab, one of the Prophet’s sons in law and friend, advised the Prophet to veil his wives so they would not be recognized, but the Prophet resisted. Until one dark night Omar recognized Sauda bint Zum‘a, one of the Prophet’s wives who happened to be very tall. He called out her name while she was defecating and she answered. It was only then that the Prophet agreed to veil his wives, and as usual Gabriel was quick to validate the decision with a new "revelation". All those lofty reasons that Muslims give today for the veil are mere rationalizations to a specific situation regarding the many wives of the Prophet.

Talking about incest and homosexuality let us examine the hanky panky that is going on today in the land of the Two Shrines and cradle of Islam.
http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/003716.html
An excerpt: {A magazine editor in Jeddah told me that many boys in Mecca, where he grew up have sexual relations with men, but they don't see themselves as gay. "Homosexuality is considered to be a stage of life, particularly at youth."}
I often wandered what were the other duties of those pre-teen boys serving wine to the faithful reclining inside silk tents in the Muslim Paradise. As if 72 nymphs for each believer is not enough.

"Islam means peace" is a lie told to the infidel unbeliever.

Here's the TRUTH:

In Arabic, the word Islam means "submission". The word Islam comes from the Arabic word that means "surrender."

Most Common Questions asked by Non-Muslims

MUSLIMS ARE FUNDAMENTALISTS AND TERRORISTS

Question:

Why are most of the Muslims fundamentalists and terrorists?

Answer:

This question is often hurled at Muslims, either directly or indirectly, during any discussion on religion or world affairs. Muslim stereotypes are perpetuated in every form of the media accompanied by gross misinformation about Islam and Muslims. In fact, such misinformation and false propaganda often leads to discrimination and acts of violence against Muslims. A case in point is the anti-Muslim campaign in the American media following the Oklahoma bomb blast, where the press was quick to declare a ‘Middle Eastern conspiracy’ behind the attack. The culprit was later identified as a soldier from the American Armed Forces.

Let us analyze this allegation of ‘fundamentalism’ and ‘terrorism’:

1. Definition of the word ‘fundamentalist’

A fundamentalist is a person who follows and adheres to the fundamentals of the doctrine or theory he is following. For a person to be a good doctor, he should know, follow, and practise the fundamentals of medicine. In other words, he should be a fundamentalist in the field of medicine. For a person to be a good mathematician, he should know, follow and practise the fundamentals of mathematics. He should be a fundamentalist in the field of mathematics. For a person to be a good scientist, he should know, follow and practise the fundamentals of science. He should be a fundamentalist in the field of science.

2. Not all ‘fundamentalists’ are the same

One cannot paint all fundamentalists with the same brush. One cannot categorize all fundamentalists as either good or bad. Such a categorization of any fund amentalist will depend upon the field or activity in which he is a fundamentalist. A fundamentalist robber or thief causes harm to society and is therefore undesirable. A fundamentalist doctor, on the other hand, benefits society and earns much respect.

3. I am proud to be a Muslim fundamentalist

I am a fundamentalist Muslim who, by the grace of Allah, knows, follows and strives to practise the fundamentals of Islam. A true Muslim does not shy away from being a fundamentalist. I am proud to be a fundamentalist Muslim because, I know that the fundamentals of Islam are beneficial to humanity and the whole world. There is not a single fundamental of Islam that causes harm or is against the interests of the human race as a whole. Many people harbour misconceptions about Islam and consider several teachings of Islam to be unfair or improper. This is due to insufficient and incorrect knowledge of Islam. If one critically analyzes the teachings of Islam with an open mind, one cannot escape the fact that Islam is full of benefits both at the individual and collective levels.

4. Dictionary meaning of the word ‘fundamentalist’

According to Webster’s dictionary ‘fundamentalism’ was a movement in American Protestanism that arose in the earlier part of the 20th century. It was a reaction to modernism, and stressed the infallibility of the Bible, not only in matters of faith and morals but also as a literal historical record. It stressed on belief in the Bible as the literal word of God. Thus fundamentalism was a word initially used for a group of Christians who believed that the Bible was the verbatim word of God without any errors and mistakes.

According to the Oxford dictionary ‘fundamentalism’ means ‘strict maintenance of ancient or fundamental doctrines of any religion, especially Islam’.

Today the moment a person uses the word fundamentalist he thinks of a Muslim who is a terrorist.

5. Every Muslim should be a terrorist

Every Muslim should be a terrorist. A terrorist is a person who causes terror. The moment a robber sees a policeman he is terrified. A policeman is a terrorist for the robber. Similarly every Muslim should be a terrorist for the antisocial elements of society, such as thieves, dacoits and rapists. Whenever such an anti-social element sees a Muslim, he should be terrified. It is true that the word ‘terrorist’ is generally used for a person who causes terror among the common people. But a true Muslim should only be a terrorist to selective people i.e. anti-social elements, and not to the common innocent people. In fact a Muslim should be a source of peace for innocent people.

6. Different labels given to the same individual for the same action, i.e. ‘terrorist’ and ‘patriot’

Before India achieved independence from British rule, some freedom fighters of India who did not subscribe to non-violence were labeled as terrorists by the British government. The same individuals have been lauded by Indians for the same activities and hailed as ‘patriots’. Thus two different labels have been given to the same people for the same set of actions. One is calling him a terrorist while the other is calling him a patriot. Those who believed that Britain had a right to rule over India called these people terrorists, while those who were of the view that Britain had no right to rule India called them patriots and freedom fighters.

It is therefore important that before a person is judged, he is given a fair hearing. Both sides of the argument should be heard, the situation should be analyzed, and the reason and the intention of the person should be taken into account, and then the person can be judged accordingly.

7. Islam means peace

Islam is derived from the word ‘salaam’ which means peace. It is a religion of peace whose fundamentals teach its followers to maintain and promote peace throughout the world.

Thus every Muslim should be a fundamentalist i.e. he should follow the fundamentals of the Religion of Peace: Islam. He should be a terrorist only towards the antisocial elements in order to promote peace and justice in the society.

All possible kind of questions asked by non muslims about Islam answered on below web site:
http://www.irf.net/irf/faqonislam/index.htm

Most Common Questions asked by Non-Muslims

HIJAAB FOR WOMEN

Question:

Why does Islam degrade women by keeping them behind the veil?

Answer:

The status of women in Islam is often the target of attacks in the secular media. The ‘hijaab’ or the Islamic dress is cited by many as an example of the ‘subjugation’ of women under Islamic law. Before we analyze the reasoning behind the religiously mandated ‘hijaab’, let us first study the status of women in societies before the advent of Islam

1. In the past women were degraded and used as objects of lust

The following examples from history amply illustrate the fact that the status of women in earlier civilizations was very low to the extent that they were denied basic human dignity:

Babylonian Civilization:
The women were degraded and were denied all rights under the Babylonian law. If a man murdered a woman, instead of him being punished, his wife was put to death.

Greek Civilization:
Greek Civilization is considered the most glorious of all ancient civilizations. Under this very ‘glorious’ system, women were deprived of all rights and were looked down upon. In Greek mythology, an ‘imaginary woman’ called ‘Pandora’ is the root cause of misfortune of human beings. The Greeks considered women to be subhuman and inferior to men. Though chastity of women was precious, and women were held in high esteem, the Greeks were later overwhelmed by ego and sexual perversions. Prostitution became a regular practice amongst all classes of Greek society.

Roman Civilization:
When Roman Civilization was at the zenith of its ‘glory’, a man even had the right to take the life of his wife. Prostitution and nudity were common amongst the Romans.

Egyptian Civilization:
The Egyptian considered women evil and as a sign of a devil.

Pre-Islamic Arabia:
Before Islam spread in Arabia, the Arabs looked down upon women and very often when a female child was born, she was buried alive.

2. Islam uplifted women and gave them equality and expects them to maintain their status.

Islam uplifted the status of women and granted them their just rights 1400 years ago. Islam expects women to maintain their status.

Hijaab for men

People usually only discuss ‘hijaab’ in the context of women. However, in the Glorious Qur’an, Allah (swt) first mentions ‘hijaab’ for men before ‘hijaab’ for the women. The Qur’an mentions in Surah Noor:

"Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty: that will make for greater purity for them: and Allah is well acquainted with all that they do."
[Al-Qur’an 24:30]

The moment a man looks at a woman and if any brazen or unashamed thought comes to his mind, he should lower his gaze.

Hijaab for women.

The next verse of Surah Noor, says:

" And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands’ fathers, their sons..."
[Al-Qur’an 24:31]

3. Six criteria for Hijaab.

According to Qur’an and Sunnah there are basically six criteria for observing hijaab:

Extent:

The first criterion is the extent of the body that should be covered. This is different for men and women. The extent of covering obligatory on the male is to cover the body at least from the navel to the knees. For women, the extent of covering obligatory is to cover the complete body except the face and the hands upto the wrist. If they wish to, they can cover even these parts of the body. Some scholars of Islam insist that the face and the hands are part of the obligatory extent of ‘hijaab’.

All the remaining five criteria are the same for men and women.

The clothes worn should be loose and should not reveal the figure.

The clothes worn should not be transparent such that one can see through them.

The clothes worn should not be so glamorous as to attract the opposite sex.

The clothes worn should not resemble that of the opposite sex.

The clothes worn should not resemble that of the unbelievers i.e. they should not wear clothes that are specifically identities or symbols of the unbelievers’ religions.

4. Hijaab includes conduct and behaviour among other things

Complete ‘hijaab’, besides the six criteria of clothing, also includes the moral conduct, behaviour, attitude and intention of the individual. A person only fulfilling the criteria of ‘hijaab’ of the clothes is observing ‘hijaab’ in a limited sense. ‘Hijaab’ of the clothes should be accompanied by ‘hijaab’ of the eyes, ‘hijaab’ of the heart, ‘hijaab’ of thought and ‘hijaab’ of intention. It also includes the way a person walks, the way a person talks, the way he behaves, etc.

5. Hijaab prevents molestation

The reason why Hijaab is prescribed for women is mentioned in the Qur’an in the following verses of Surah Al-Ahzab:

"O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad); that is most convenient, that they should be known (as such) and not molested. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."
[Al-Qur’an 33:59]

The Qur’an says that Hijaab has been prescribed for the women so that they are recognized as modest women and this will also prevent them from being molested.

6. Example of twin sisters

Suppose two sisters who are twins, and who are equally beautiful, walk down the street. One of them is attired in the Islamic hijaab i.e. the complete body is covered, except for the face and the hands up to the wrists. The other sister is wearing western clothes, a mini skirt or shorts. Just around the corner there is a hooligan or ruffian who is waiting for a catch, to tease a girl. Whom will he tease? The girl wearing the Islamic Hijaab or the girl wearing the skirt or the mini? Naturally he will tease the girl wearing the skirt or the mini. Such dresses are an indirect invitation to the opposite sex for teasing and molestation. The Qur’an rightly says that hijaab prevents women from being molested.

7. Capital punishment for the rapists

Under the Islamic shariah, a man convicted of having raped a woman, is given capital punishment. Many are astonished at this ‘harsh’ sentence. Some even say that Islam is a ruthless, barbaric religion! I have asked a simple question to hundreds of non-Muslim men. Suppose, God forbid, someone rapes your wife, your mother or your sister. You are made the judge and the rapist is brought in front of you. What punishment would you give him? All of them said they would put him to death. Some went to the extent of saying they would torture him to death. To them I ask, if someone rapes your wife or your mother you want to put him to death. But if the same crime is committed on somebody else’s wife or daughter you say capital punishment is barbaric. Why should there be double standards?

8. Western society falsely claims to have uplifted women

Western talk of women’s liberalization is nothing but a disguised form of exploitation of her body, degradation of her soul, and deprivation of her honour. Western society claims to have ‘uplifted’ women. On the contrary it has actually degraded them to the status of concubines, mistresses and society butterflies who are mere tools in the hands of pleasure seekers and sex marketeers, hidden behind the colourful screen of ‘art’ and ‘culture’.

9. USA has one of the highest rates of rape

United States of America is supposed to be one of the most advanced countries of the world. It also has one of the highest rates of rape in any country in the world. According to a FBI report, in the year 1990, every day on an average 1756 cases of rape were committed in U.S.A alone. Later another report said that on an average everyday 1900 cases of rapes are committed in USA. The year was not mentioned. May be it was 1992 or 1993. May be the Americans got ‘bolder’ in the following years.

Consider a scenario where the Islamic hijaab is followed in America. Whenever a man looks at a woman and any brazen or unashamed thought comes to his mind, he lowers his gaze. Every woman wears the Islamic hijaab, that is the complete body is covered except the face and the hands upto the wrist. After this if any man commits rape he is given capital punishment. I ask you, in such a scenario, will the rate of rape in America increase, will it remain the same, or will it decrease?

10. Implementation of Islamic Shariah will reduce the rate of rapes

Naturally as soon as Islamic Shariah is implemented positive results will be inevitable. If Islamic Shariah is implemented in any part of the world, whether it is America or Europe, society will breathe easier. Hijaab does not degrade a woman but uplifts a woman and protects her modesty and chastity.

All possible kind of questions asked by non muslims about Islam answered on below web site:
http://www.irf.net/irf/faqonislam/index.htm

Victoria:
Nitpicking again to avoid confronting the essence of the issue. Saudi women are Muslim women who, furthermore,are living in the cradle of Islam.
You say "personally, im doing splendidly without your slant".I know you are doing "splendidly" because you are not living in a predominantly Muslim country. I am showing a solidarity with those other women because I hate injustice. What are you doing to improve their status? Defending the actions of those who are subjugating them and at the same time badmouthing those of us who show some empathy with them is not even remotely constructive?

faithfulservant3-

i think this is a horror. what do your think?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cS4HmV6duiU

i'm curious to see if the christian groups that rushed to help muslims suffering in darfur, will rush to eqypt to help their own..

I am saddened when I read comments from so many people who demonize Muslims and Islam, especially when so many state that they are Christians.

One of the first lessons of faith is humility (Deuteronomy 8:2-3 and 1 Peter 5:5-6). Too bad most of us have not learned this. Our strength is made perfect in this weakness that causes others to hear our words of peace (see 2 Corinthians 12:9).

There are so many positive similarities between Christianity, Judaism and Islam that it would be unproductive to expand upon here. The world would be a better place if we built upon what we have in common through love.

There is more that we have in common.

Those Christians who demonize Muslims must have forgotten the not too distant past when Americans brutalized others and justified it by erroneously citing scripture. The Old Testament’s rules of warfare (Deuteronomy chapter 20, especially see 21:10-14 on female captives) could be deemed draconian and barbaric. The book of Psalms speaks variously of happily dashing the heads of their enemies’ children against rocks (137:9); washing their “feet in the blood of the wicked” (58:10) and dogs lapping up the leftovers (68:23).

Thank God our relationship with the Lord has grown and evolved and we now live under grace and mercy. We all too often hear too much about obedience to God and not the Lord’s forgiveness. This forgiveness is to be showered on others (Mathew 6:14-15 and Mark 11:25-26). Remember Jesus expanded the commandment to “love your enemy.”

There is no worthier avocation than preaching the gospel and helping the Lord save souls. The essence of this is humbly and lovingly presenting who you are and explaining God’s love—mostly through deeds. Anger, hatred and violence drives out the Spirit.

If you really had faith and believed in heaven you wouldn’t be so afraid to die that you support killing. At least the oppressed Muslim women have life, unlike all of the innocent civilians killed in war. But many of them, those who have not had a fair chance to hear the gospel, will get that chance.

If you really care about persecuted Muslims, pray for them, share your wealth with those who are poor, and talk to them. Help them grow! I am sure that you will find that few are the monsters many make them out to be.

And I will continue to do the same. And I pray for “Christians” who hate.

ibrahim- even transposing a sentence from a post you can see seems too difficult for you to do correctly-

it is SAUDI women, not MUSLIM women-

as a muslim woman- you have no insight or ability to attempt to speak for us

personally, im doing splendidly without your slant

Tim
Re: Dania al Ghalib's article "Muslim Women are Always Guilty".
This is a desperate cry for Allah to secure her, and her Muslim sisters, justice from their menfolk. The Muslim men, on the other hand, deflect the blame on to Allah by asserting that they are only executing His commands. Therein lies the logjam. To loosen the logs is easy if the Muslims realize that the Quran is NOT God's word or even inspired by God, but manmade by a 7th Century Bedouin. This should be easily obvious to any thinking person with rudiments of critical thinking. Every page of this book is a flagrant insult to and violation of human rationality. The minute this is realized by the men who subjugate their women, the Muslim women can begin to lobby effectively for equality.

You people are getting paid for writing hatred & wasting our precious time.

You people are getting paid for writing hatred & wasting our precious time.

The link posted by Moody is the site of:

ZAKIR (Every Muslim Should be a Terrorist) NAIK

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxk5AAA5FbI

also known as

ZAKIR (Muslims Did Not Do 911) NAIK

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7L3a_83jt0Q

ZAKIR NAIK is a wingnut extremist stoking the fires of ethnic, political, and religious hatred....

(I begin to understand the source of Moody's irrational rage and CAPPED-OUT anger against the west.)

Moody, Moody, Moody,

Hmmm, checking your referenced site:( questions asked by non-Muslims who know something about Islam)

"1. QUR'AN IS THE HANDIWORK OF MUHAMMAD AND NOT THE WORD OF GOD ?
Question:

Is it not true that Qur'an is the handiwork of Muhammad and not the work of God ?

Answer:

Under Construction "

What kind of Answer is that?????

The rest of the answers are negated by the fact that the Mo never received anything from allah because allah's messenger, Gabe, the pretty thingie, is a fictional character borrowed from the superstitious ancients. Then there are the facts that Mo was illiterate and the historical verification that the koran's "few" militaristic passages were used as the reasons for the pludering and pillaging lands of non-believers.

Your attempt to obfuscate the flaws in the founder and foundations of Islam simply reinforces the words of that famous quote.

"NO ONE IS SAFE, UNTIL THE KORAN IS DEFLAWED!!!!"

Spiderman2:

So pedophile priests, The Inquisition, the forced conversion of native tribes, the selling of Indulgences, Paul's erroneous prediction of the second coming his lifetime and the myths/embellishments of the OT and NT were gifts from God????

You need to study about the real Jesus before making anymore commentary. The references listed at http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html
will get you started on your path to Reality.

All possible kind of questions asked by non muslims about Islam answered on below web site:

http://www.irf.net/irf/faqonislam/index.htm

Another current story of Saudi oppression of women-

American woman humiliated in Saudi
Fri, 08 Feb 2008 02:06:47

Women face tough segregation under Islamic laws in Saudi and can not drive.

An Arab-American woman was released after she was thrown in jail by Saudi's religious police for sitting with a man at a coffee shop.

Yara, who refused to give her last name for fear of police repercussions, is a 37 year old married mother of three and the daughter of Jordanian parents. She alleges she was strip-searched and forced to sign a false confession before being released.

She spent a day behind bars on the charge that she was sitting with a male colleague at a Starbucks coffee shop in Riyadh, The Times of London reported.

Yara works for a finance company in Riyadh. Her problem began when her office lost electricity. She and her colleagues then went to a nearby Starbucks to use the coffee shop's Internet connection.

She sat with a male colleague in the Starbucks' family area, the only place women are allowed to sit with men.

“Some men came up to us with white dresses. They asked 'Why are you here together?' I explained about the power being out in our office. They got very angry and told me what I was doing was a great sin,” she told The Times.

Yara told the paper that she would remain in Saudi Arabia to challenge the insult to her honor rather than return to America, without stipulating just what she had in mind to do.

A US Embassy official told The Times that it was being treated as “an internal Saudi matter” and refused to comment on her case. Observers familiar with such cases note she will probably be advised by the embassy to drop the matter and return home.

The UN watchdog for women's rights has repeatedly criticized Saudi Arabia and has challenged the kingdom's record on women's rights.

In 2007 a Shia woman was gang-raped, sentenced to 200 lashes and six years in jail for having been in an unrelated man's car at the time. She was pardoned by King Abdullah, although he maintained the sentence had been fair.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=42152§ionid=351020205

Also from the infidelsarecool site- (thanks for the link, HT)

Saudi Woman Is Always Guilty!
Dania Al-Ghalib, Al-Madinah

The Saudi woman is guilty. She is guilty of being born in a male-dominated society. Her fault is that she grows up in a society that stigmatizes her sex as a sin. She is held accountable because society believes she is underaged — even if she is in her 60s — and implements a guardianship system over her as if she were a second-rate citizen. It is very common for a Saudi woman — a widow or a divorcee — to have her young son as her guardian and she needs his written permission to carry out official paperwork. He is in control of her life and her destiny.

The Saudi woman can be blamed for living in a male-dominated society that opposes many rights for women despite the fact that the Prophet (peace be upon him) — the best of all humans — consulted a woman and listened to her advice. The Saudi woman is guilty of living in a society that confuses tradition with Islamic obligations and idolizes what it sees as the latter to the extent that when she wants to discuss or object, she is accused of rebellion. Her fault is that society considers her an item of her guardian’s property. He can do anything he desires with her without asking her opinion or even listening to her.

The Saudi woman is born undesired. Everybody wants a male child rather than a female one. This innocent creature is forcibly taught what is prohibited and shameful before even knowing how to speak. She is guilty if she remains silent and guilty if she talks. She is guilty if she is divorced and guilty if she cleaves to her husband and children when someone tries unjustifiably to destroy her marriage. Her only refuge is prison where she has the right to say no. She has lost all her rights and has fought for one that allows her to live only behind bars. Her sin is that she tried to protect her marriage and family. But traditions and customs challenged and destroyed her attempts.

The Saudi woman is guilty of being raped in darkness or in daylight because her society wants her locked in, producing legal children and never leaving her house unless she is dead and of course accompanied by a guardian. She is guilty when brutal beasts tear her body and soul apart, threatening her with weapons and defamation because society believes she subjected herself to them and she deserves what happens to her.

She is guilty because society prohibits her from driving and forces her to live at the mercy of a foreign driver. He might rape her one day or make money by allowing others to rape her, and then she will be the one who is blamed for having put herself in such position and went out with a driver without her legal guardian.

The Saudi woman is guilty because she is part of her guardian’s property even when he is a criminal, serving time in jail and he marries her off to his colleague in prison who is awaiting execution. Society is aware of this and apparently sees no harm in such. In fact, the community blessed this marriage and arranged for them to be legally alone together. And the woman’s fault is that she is the daughter of a criminal.

The Saudi woman is guilty of being haunted by spinsterhood and not accepting “misyar” and all other types of male-invented marriages. She is also guilty if she accepts being abandoned by her husband when he feels tired and bored with her and wants a new wife. She is guilty if she objects to anything and her legal guardian beats her until he breaks her ribs or permanently disfigures her. His right is to beat her and make her obey and listen, even if that means deforming her physical features as a woman and taking away her beauty.

She is guilty when others confiscate her property or real estate by impersonating her, and her greatest sin is that her identity stems from her guardian. The Saudi woman is always guilty and anyone who thinks of dealing with her humanely is a criminal.

http://arabnews.com/?page=13§ion=0&article=104942&d=29&m=12&y=2007

From MEMRI, below is a video of a female Saudi newscaster standing up for herself against a Saudi cleric who believes women should stop “tempting” men by having the gall to show their hair or neck. Here’s an excerpt of the transcript:

[Cleric] Nasser Al-Huneini: On the issue of the hijab, all religious scholars are in agreement that if revealing a woman’s face might lead to temptation and other things, it is forbidden. In addition, even when they permitted the revealing of the woman’s face, they placed restrictions on this. Even Sheik Al-Albani did so. They stated that only the face and the palms may be exposed. The woman is not allowed to expose her neck or her hair. She is not allowed to appear with make-up or jewelry. The religious scholars have all agreed upon this.

[Female Newscaster] Buthayna Nasser: Who are these people who wish to decide for me how I should behave? Why do you treat me as less qualified just because I am a woman? Why is there always a male voice deciding how I should behave?

The Lord created me equal to you in my duties, punishment, and reward. When you fast, I fast. When you pray, I pray. When you steal, your hand is cut off, and when I steal, my hand is cut off. This is the greatest evidence that I am not less qualified. I know what I am doing, and I know how to maintain my honor.

Nasser also decribes how Saudi’s are “brainwashed” from an early age:

Walid wondered how I, as a newscaster, can describe Saudi society as being brainwashing. There is nothing to be surprising about, Dr. Walid. From the age of six or seven, from elementary school until high school, when we reach the age of 18, and even later, when we go to university - we memorize, memorize, and memorize. Whoever dares to argue or to question anything is called upon to ask for Allah’s forgiveness. He is told that this will get him into Hell. You, who frighten people with Hell, have brought them a hell upon earth.

You have banned books of the various intellectual streams. You’ve prevented the mind from operating, thinking, comparing, and choosing, even though it is the same mind that the Creator gave people in order to choose between Paradise and Hell. Our Lord honored Man by giving him the freedom to choose his path in this life, and the consequences are revealed in the world to come. Deeds are measured by the intent, and, as the Great Teacher taught us, good intentions steer our behavior. Yes sir, we are being brainwashed on a daily basis…

This just shows how Muslim men, in this case Saudi Muslim men, have formed opinions and preach/teach about how women should dress, act, and speak; and their sexist views come, not from Allah, but from their own power obsessions. This is the best explanation of how (Muslim) women are in fact equal, despite what the Muslim men have tried to brainwash everyone into thinking. I wonder if this woman had consequences for the words she spoke?

From: infidelsarecool.com/2007/04/14/female-saudi-newscaster-we-are-brainwashed-daily/

Victoria, Victoria, Victoria,

And we assume you also suffer from the following "beliefs"???????

1. Believe in "pretty/ugly wingie" thingies and teach your children that such fictional things really exist.

2. Believe that the long-dead Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the hot "Gabe" cave and therein received the warmongering and anti-female words now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis believe they are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life.

4. That Islam is perfect and the koran inherently condones no sin even though the 24/7, 800 year-old blood feud between Sunnis and Shiites gives significant credence that greed, hate, suicides, assassinations, maiming, and murder are condoned by the koran. Having multiple wives also gives significant credence to the sins of rape, adultery, lust and polygamy. The condoned treatment of these wives gives credence that the koran allows the sins of hatred, anger and greed.

Muslim Pupils Are Being Brainwashed on a Daily Basis

"A female Saudi newscaster standing up for herself against a Saudi cleric who believes women should stop “tempting” men by having the gall to show their hair or neck. Here’s an excerpt of the transcript:

[Cleric] Nasser Al-Huneini: On the issue of the hijab, all religious scholars are in agreement that if revealing a woman’s face might lead to temptation and other things, it is forbidden. In addition, even when they permitted the revealing of the woman’s face, they placed restrictions on this. Even Sheik Al-Albani did so. They stated that only the face and the palms may be exposed. The woman is not allowed to expose her neck or her hair. She is not allowed to appear with make-up or jewelry. The religious scholars have all agreed upon this.

[Female Newscaster] Buthayna Nasser: Who are these people who wish to decide for me how I should behave? Why do you treat me as less qualified just because I am a woman? Why is there always a male voice deciding how I should behave? The Lord created me equal to you in my duties, punishment, and reward. When you fast, I fast. When you pray, I pray. When you steal, your hand is cut off, and when I steal, my hand is cut off. This is the greatest evidence that I am not less qualified. I know what I am doing, and I know how to maintain my honor.

Nasser also decribes how Muslim pupil’s are “brainwashed” from an early age:

Walid wondered how I, as a newscaster, can describe Saudi society as being brainwashing. There is nothing to be surprising about, Dr. Walid. From the age of six or seven, from elementary school until high school, when we reach the age of 18, and even later, when we go to university - we memorize, memorize, and memorize. Whoever dares to argue or to question anything is called upon to ask for Allah’s forgiveness. He is told that this will get him into Hell. You, who frighten people with Hell, have brought them a hell upon earth.

You have banned books of the various intellectual streams. You’ve prevented the mind from operating, thinking, comparing, and choosing, even though it is the same mind that the Creator gave people in order to choose between Paradise and Hell. Our Lord honored Man by giving him the freedom to choose his path in this life, and the consequences are revealed in the world to come. Deeds are measured by the intent, and, as the Great Teacher taught us, good intentions steer our behavior. Yes sir, we are being brainwashed on a daily basis…"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhkhYZCJ5hU

Muslim Pupils More Tolerant Than Non-Muslims

By Emdad Rahman

Writer, Journalist - UK

Dr. Holden

"The Burnley Project: Evaluating the Contribution of Interfaith Dialogue to Community Cohesion" is a Home Office-funded study (August 2005 - July 2007) conducted by Lancaster University's Department of Religious Studies, with a research team headed by Dr. Alan Billings and Dr. Andrew Holden. The study is funded in the wake of the Burnley riots.

In contradiction to reports of Muslim youth being vulnerable to terrorist recruitment tactics, the Burnley Project, whose findings are to be published in April 2007 suggests that Muslim pupils in Lancashire are more moderate, forbearing, and tolerant than their white counterparts.

In contradiction to reports of Muslim youth being vulnerable to terrorist recruitment tactics, the Burnley Project, whose findings are to be published this year, suggests that Muslim pupils in Lancashire are more moderate, forbearing, and tolerant than their white counterparts.

The principal aim of the study was to establish the extent to which interfaith dialogue and activities are able to bring segregated communities together in the governorate of Burnley as well as to highlight the types of initiatives that work best. Attention was also paid to which community leaders accurately represent the attitudes of their communities. The project also looked at young people at secondary level through to 30-year-olds to establish whether attitudes towards faith are changing between generations and to explore the potential for interfaith initiatives in the future.

The content of the report thus far represents a summary of some key findings at the halfway stage of the project, based on primary fieldwork carried out between October 2005 and June 2006. The content should be of interest to policy makers, public sector administrators, and those involved in the facilitation of interfaith initiatives.

A disturbing aspect of the study pointed out that almost a third of white pupils, compared to a tenth and a fifth in a school predominantly Asian and a mixed school respectively, believe that one particular race is superior to another.

The Social Setting

According to the 2001 census, 74.5 percent of people in Burnley described themselves as Christian and 6.6 percent as Muslim, signifying that religion plays an important part in concepts of self-identity even among those who do not regularly attend religious places of worship. The town is also home to a small number of Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, and Jews. The report contextualizes as follows:

Like all areas of the UK, Burnley has seen a huge decline in church attendance since the 1950s. Not surprisingly, the interview data confirms that church going among younger generations has reached an all-time low in Burnley — a trend that is explicable by sociological analysis. The exception to this is a Pentecostal church, situated in the west of the town, that has managed to attract an increasing number of younger people to its Sunday evening service since the summer of 2005. … Mosque attendance is rather more evident, although this too is changing. While the number of midday Friday worshippers remains quite high in all nine mosques, attendance at other times is much more sporadic. The dearth of official mosque attendance data and the tendency of many Muslim women to worship at home, however, make any attempt to ascertain frequency of worship very difficult.

The study questions the popular notion that ethnic communities in Britain are ceasing to be concerned about integrating with their "new" culture and are instead strengthening their ties with the countries they originally emigrated from. In doing so, the study attempts to address this issue that revolves around mixing with others, by looking at the nature of extracurricular activities, attitudes towards race and ethnicity, views on faith-based cohesion and faith-based relations attached to place of origin, and more importantly, allegiance to common values.

Working closely with Building Bridges Burnley — an interfaith group of Muslims and Christians — over 400 15-year-olds were questioned about their attitudes towards race, religion, and cultural integration in the summer term of 2006. The pupils came from three non-religious schools, all in deprived areas: One school had mainly white pupils, one school had mainly Asian students, and the third school had a mixture.

Holden believes there is sufficient evidence from the school survey and from the other aspects of the project to support the claim that although the different faith and ethnic communities of Burnley manage to live amicably together most of the time, it is still largely a governorate in which social interaction between ethnic groups remains tenuous. This segregation manifests itself in housing, with the majority of the town's Asian population concentrated in three of the most deprived wards. However, it is worth mentioning that an increasing number of initiatives have been launched since 2001 — including annual cultural events, neighborhood renewal schemes, urban regeneration programs, interfaith projects, and more recently the restructuring of secondary education — all of which possess the potential to improve integration within the town and to challenge some of the negative perceptions that the main faith and ethnic communities often hold of one another.

The Findings

Although the inquiry is yielding some interesting findings, it is important to note that the findings so far have been culled from the first of a two-year investigation. Holden found that most pupils at the mainly Muslim school were well-integrated and loyal to the UK.

"A significant and overwhelming majority were greatly in favor of moderate, democratic, and liberal ideals. Principles included tolerance of those with different views, being gracious to people from diverse religious and ethnic groups, freedom of speech, and respect for others."

The report found that the higher levels of intolerance at the school with a majority white-pupil attendance were linked to widespread resentment among white residents, who felt that the local council had unfairly allocated extra funds to the Asian community.

"It is the increasing consequence of myths and stereotype, negative discernment of diversity, and apprehension towards change that educators, outreach workers, and educational support staff must make every effort to combat," Holden said.

Gathering information from the questionnaires given to students from each school, we can establish the following information:

In School A (Exclusively white pupils from low-income families and high-crime areas):

19 percent of Year 10 believed in God.
16 percent had been exposed to religious influences by parents or other relatives.
8 percent attended church once a week.
45 percent said that home is the greatest influence on them, but friends are equally influential.
2 percent gave greater respect to faith leaders.
41 percent were able to name a member of the Christian clergy.
49 percent thought religion is unimportant or did not really care.
50 percent were willing to listen to other people's religious views.
40 percent believed that Christianity and Islam taught how to be a good person.
30 percent believed that one race was superior to another.
29 percent were in favor of different faith communities working together.

In School B (Located in a more affluent area than School A, with 96 percent of pupils of Asian heritage):

97 percent of Year 10 believed in God.
96 percent had been exposed to religious influences by parents or other relatives.
81 percent had attended mosques at least once a week.
41 percent said that home is the greatest influence on them.
43 percent gave greater respect to faith leaders (though there is some contradictory results as to whether relatives are more influential than faith leaders).
68 percent were able to name a Muslim cleric.
10 percent thought religion is unimportant or did not care.
86 percent were willing to listen to other people's religious views.
83 percent believed that Christianity and Islam taught how to be a good person.
11.3 percent believed that one race was superior to another.
76 percent were in favor of different faith communities working together.
In School C (Located in a similar area to School B with 73 percent of pupils white British and 27 percent of Asian heritage):

33 percent said that home is the greatest influence on them.
11 percent gave greater respect to faith leaders.
41 percent believed that Christianity and Islam taught how to be a good person.
18.5 percent believed that one race was superior to another.
34 percent were in favor of different faith communities working together.
Responses

"It does not surprise me that Muslim students are more tolerant as they are exposed to different cultures and religions from a young age," said Shalina Hussein, a Child Protection Officer and freelance journalist from East London.

"For example, Muslim children may go to a Church of England primary school and learn about Christianity and other religions without compromising their own beliefs, yet attend mosques at the weekends to learn about Islam. This enables the children to learn about their own religion and other faiths leading to a tolerant and informed attitude towards religion."

"Muslims are also encouraged to be active members of society and to work with their neighbors of whatever faith or race to create a safer and happier environment. It is very pleasing to read the findings of the survey as it goes a long way to proving that Muslims are tolerant and it is only a minority who is narrow minded," concluded Shalina.

Cindy van den Bremen, a contextual designer and creative advisor from the Netherlands was pleased with the report.

"I'm glad to finally read some positive news and research concerning Muslims. Personally, I favor the mixed schools, or public schools as we call them in the Netherlands. I was a 'product' of a mixed school, together with my upbringing as a humanist made me the person who I am right now. I'm used to having friends from different backgrounds, cultures, and religions and have mixed couple friends in a bicultural marriage."

If interfaith dialogue is to have any real impact in the education system, it is essential that the many possible ways of including it are tried and tested. … Although spiritual and philosophical considerations are mentioned in most subject syllabuses, they seldom receive anything other than tokenistic attention from classroom teachers who are given precious little time to prepare innovative lessons.

The Burnley Project

WTC wrote, " Islam confesses that Jesus came in the flesh".

That is false. No Muslim believes that Jesus is God.

Craig,

The U.S is comprised of the faithful and secularists. God protects the faithful but leaves the secularists to fend for themselves. Part of America will be protected and parts will be destroyed by its enemies. The faithful will destroy its enemies and ultimnately will rule this world fully and without opposition. "Justice for all" will be the norm and it would be heavenly.

Concerned the Christian Now Liberated,

You claim to be a christian before but now liberated. Im sorry to tell you that catholicism is not Christianity and you were liberated from the bondage of Catechism but not christianity. True Christianity is a gift from God and nobody in his right mind would repudiate that gift.

"The U.S. has made huge steps forward to a more inclusive society. That doesn't mean the journey is over. Affect what you can, when you can. Moaning about what other nations are doing (or aren't doing) is a waste of time."

Craig you forget three things.

1- America was founded as an inclusive nation and as a bastion of protection for human and civil rights. It is each generation's responsibility to interpret the times and maintain their freedoms.

2- "Affecting what you can, when you can" in an Islamic nation will often gain you a rather painful end to a short life.

3- Moaning is not a waste of time. I encourage the readers here to moan loudy and in unison starting with:

A petition for Kambakhsh’s release which can be signed on the Reporters Without Borders website at:

http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=25199

SAVE SAYED KAMBAKHSH

Sentenced to death for reading about women’s rights.

Every interfaith group session should begin with the historic flaws of the major religions. By doing this, there would only be one faith left i.e. Reality!!!!!

Once again as a counter to the milleniums of religious mumbo jumbo thumping:

1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was probably an embellishment of the lives of three different men or a mythical character as was Moses, the "Tablet-Man" who talked to burning bushes and made much magic in Egypt.

1.5 million Conservative Jews and their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT. http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm

2. Jesus, the illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter possibly suffering from hallucinations, has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".

3. Mohammed, an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

This agenda continues as shown by the assassination of Bhutto, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”.

And who funds these acts of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

4. Luther, Calvin, Joe Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingy talking flying fictional thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

5. Hinduism (from an online Hindu site) - "Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centered and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’."

The caste/laborer system and cow worship are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism."

6. Buddhism- "Buddhism began in India about 500 years before the birth of Christ. The people living at that time had become disillusioned with certain beliefs of Hinduism including the caste system, which had grown extremely complex. The number of outcasts (those who did not belong to any particular caste) was continuing to grow."
"However, in Buddhism, like so many other religions, fanciful stories arose concerning events in the life of the founder, Siddhartha Gautama (fifth century B.C.):"

Archaeological discoveries have proved, beyond a doubt, his historical character, but apart from the legends we know very little about the circumstances of his life. e.g. Buddha by one legend was supposedly talking when he came out of his mother's womb.

Bottom line: There are many good ways of living but be aware of the hallucinations, embellishments, lies and myths surrounding the founders and foundations of said rules of life.

Our recognition of the oneness of humanity and our action to create unity (the choice to act in accord with our oneness) is what matters. The name-calling, self-righteousness, and self-justification I see from many of the posters here only serve to distance us still further from the will and word of God.

"The well-being of mankind, its peace and security, are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established. This unity can never be achieved so long as the counsels which the Pen of the Most High hath revealed are suffered to pass unheeded.

"Through the power of the words He hath uttered the whole of the human race can be illumined with the light of unity, and the remembrance of His Name is able to set on fire the hearts of all men, and burn away the veils that intervene between them and His glory. One righteous act is endowed with a potency that can so elevate the dust as to cause it to pass beyond the heaven of heavens. It can tear every bond asunder, and hath the power to restore the force that hath spent itself and vanished....

"Be pure, O people of God, be pure; be righteous, be righteous.... Say: O people of God! That which can ensure the victory of Him Who is the Eternal Truth, His hosts and helpers on earth, have been set down in the sacred Books and Scriptures, and are as clear and manifest as the sun. These hosts are such righteous deeds, such conduct and character, as are acceptable in His sight. Whoso ariseth, in this Day, to aid Our Cause, and summoneth to his assistance the hosts of a praiseworthy character and upright conduct, the influence flowing from such an action will, most certainly, be diffused throughout the whole world." (Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 286)

Spiderman2 and Holy Bible: I think neither of you understands the depth of the other faiths you criticize nor their tremendous underlying similarity to your own.

NO RELIGION states that works alone are sufficient for salvation. But even the Bible itself also states that faith devoid of works is worthless. Go to your concordance and look up "works." Faith followed by deeds is what the world needs. If you read the Bible closely, you will see that neither faith alone nor deeds alone is acceptable.

I think also you mis-speak what the Bible says is the spirit of Antichrist: 1 John 4:2-3: "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world." Islam confesses that Jesus came in the flesh. Many modern Muslims are in error about some Christian teachings and history (such as the crucifixion). But these are errors of interpretation, not errors of the Qur'an itself. The Qur'an says "They thought they crucified Him but it was only a semblance." The widespread erroneous Muslim belief that a simulacrum was placed on the cross is an interpretive corruption (and I think even the Christian world has these kinds of misreadings - such as "end of the world" for "end of the age"). There were Muslim theologians who read the Qur'an as saying that those who sought Jesus' death were not able to truly kill Him; it only appeared that He was literally dead in the way that Jesus' Jewish contemporaries thought of death. The idea was that by killing Jesus, they had rid themselves of this toubling Galilean preacher once and for all. But the idea that it only appeared that He had been killed is totally in accord with the Christian doctrine that Jesus "rose from the dead" - that is, that His reality is not gone and stilled but is alive and with us. Indeed the Qur'an also recounts Jesus speaking from the cradle saying: "peace upon me the day I was born, and the day I die, and the day I shall be raised up alive."

"In the end what will happen will be what has happened whenever a civilization breaks up. The people who have brains and courage come through and the ones who haven't are winnowed out."

I can't disagree Craig. At the same time, if the nurses capable of applying band-aids don't become doctors capable of effectively treating the wound away, all we've done is waste a lot of band-aids. Mr Patel strikes me as a better candidate for the patient role than the nurse role.

Good luck to interfaith for youth.
It is failing in all Campuses, except eating ethnic food.
Another name, multi ethnicity has failed in Britain, creating more religious disharmony, radical mosques, and more suicide bombers.
It has failed in India in the last sixty years with more radical Islamist creating panic throughout India, a tribute to the coalition government eagerly committed to appeasement policy.
Mahatma Gandhi tried to unite Hindus and Muslims with song God is the name whether Hindus call it Iswar and Muslim call it Allah. But Muslims call only Allah as there is no God other than Allah.He failed to stop the partition of India on the basis of religion. He died finally to protect Muslim interest, but not a single Muslim acknowledges his sacrifice. They praise Mr. Zinnah for getting them a separate land.
These interfaith forums including one bt the Post are useless where Muslims only defending their religion and believe their religion has be to be accepted by all, no deviation.
PLEASE STOP THESE HYPOCRACIES.

Hello Eboo, ltns, I trust that you and your family are well.

Keeping the youth interested can be a passion for some people. Community and leadership building skills are important to me. To counter-act peer pressure that leads to experimentation with nicotene, drugs and alchohol, numerous social service agencies public and private know that self confidence and esteem building empowers the younger generation to "just say no" ;)

I have participated in ropes challenges courses, including a form of bungy jumping which developes trust between individual members of groups. Studying group dynamics is part of ridding our society of negative paradigms carried by my generation like, "To be cool, you gots to get high". There are several organizations nonprofit or for profit that run these sort of retreats for community building through group challenges. I guess these trends are more visible now as the Recovery industry has been utilizing these techniques for years. And that recovery from drug and alcohol addiction for younger Americans indicates treatment programs lasting at least 6 months. Someone has to be dedicated to long term progress, especially those disadvantaged in our society.

There is a concept in electical engineering that a battery is an electrical motive force, emf. If one presses a key of a remote control device, the batteries supplying an emf result in an rf impulse that actually change the channel of a tv for example.

So a battery being an emf has electrical potential. That potential applied to a circuit is dissipated through usage. The system is dependent on grounding. That is to say, without negative plates absorbing positive charges, the circuit is incomplete.

A car battery has a normal operating amperage capacity. Batteries are also rated for temporary cranking amperage in which an emf of a greater magnitude can be delivered on a temporary basis as opposed to longterm stability of normal usage.

What am I trying to say here you ask ? I dunno. As I have stated in the past, I have worked with those in your family contributing to our society as electrical engineers.

Be well.

Vinay said: "I agree with above poster that it is Mr. Patel's 50 plus intolerant Islamic nations who need tolerance and diversity much more than USA.".

Are you living in one of these nations, Vinay? I understand what you are saying, and to be honest I agree with you. However, I do not live in one of these nations. In fact, very little (if anything) I could do would directly influence any nation other than the one I live in.

The U.S. has made huge steps forward to a more inclusive society. That doesn't mean the journey is over. Affect what you can, when you can. Moaning about what other nations are doing (or aren't doing) is a waste of time.

Craig

I agree with above poster that it is Mr. Patel's 50 plus intolerant Islamic nations who need tolerance and diversity much more than USA

TJ said: "I applaud your efforts to try to get everyone to place nice, but they are misdirected. We need to heal the wounds, not apply band-aids."

I agree with your sentiment, but I think that the "band-aids" are a start in the right direction. The initiation of this type of enterprise may be a band-aid to stop the immediate bleeding, but the continuation of it is the cauterization and antiseptic needed to truly heal the wound.

LORI said: "I am energized by the prospect of a society of acceptance and cooperation, and inspired by the children and their supportive trusted adults who are leading us in that direction. If only this movement were more widespread - what can we, as adults, do to help?"

I, too, find myself encouraged by the very existance of these groups. Janet Penn (in an earlier post) listed a website for a Canadian interfaith organization (www.cccj.ca). I checked this out and there are volunteering opportunities. Also, monetary gifts may be made. This is probably very similar to groups in the U.S.

Craig

Based on all the highly research and some not so highly researched comments, a lot of people out there like to feel superior to other people and they use Religion as a tool to this end.

Remember "Never a borrower nor a lender be!"

Amen!

How do you reconcile what seems to be a blatant contradiction between your 2 posts, SPIDERMAN2?

First post -
"The japs tried to cross the massive ocean to invade but they all drowned with their ships trying.

You can try it again like they did, and you'll get the same result."

Second post -
"For the enemies that will hit the liberals and secularist in America, these 2 massive oceans are not a hindrance anymore. It's as simple as pushing a button. But God won't intervene and would just let it happen. Why? Because they never asked."

Thanks,
Craig

Why do the adherents of these supposedly peace-loving religions need such help in order to play nice with one another?

Your dual positions of Muslim and Interfaith-let's-play-nice-please director reminds me of the episode of The Three Stooges where the boys are exterminators and they fill the house up with mice so they have something to exterminate.

I applaud your efforts to try to get everyone to place nice, but they are misdirected. We need to heal the wounds, not apply band-aids.

I am energized by the prospect of a society of acceptance and cooperation, and inspired by the children and their supportive trusted adults who are leading us in that direction. If only this movement were more widespread - what can we, as adults, do to help?

A. KAFIR,

The holy Scriptures say this about you and your prophet.

"Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also. (1 John 2:22-23).

For the enemies that will hit the liberals and secularist in America, these 2 massive oceans are not a hindrance anymore. It's as simple as pushing a button. But God won't intervene and would just let it happen. Why? Because they never asked.

"America has been protected by 2 massive oceans from 2 World Wars. "

That's correct and God made the 2 massive oceans too.

The japs tried to cross the massive ocean to invade but they all drowned with their ships trying.

You can try it again like they did, and you'll get the same result.

Spiderman2 says:

"America has been protected by God from two World Wars but not this time because of the increasing liberalism and secularism among its people.".

America has been protected by 2 massive oceans from 2 World Wars.

Janet - Thanks for the info! Toronto's not far from me...maybe I'll check that out.

Cheers,
Craig

All these talk and activities about interfaith is just an exercise of blind leading the blind.

The reason why the U.S is the greatest country is because it is the country that fit to the description of Apostle Paul which says that the children of faith and NOT the children of works (this includes the four major religions [ Islam, Budhism, Hinduism, Judaism ] and some major false christian religions like catholicism) will inherit and rule the earth. A big portion of the people in the U.S and even the first settlers in Plymouth, Massachusetts believe that scripture. They inherit the prophecy by believing it. This country will ultimately rule the earth coz that is the prophecy.

The U.S. did not start WW2 but that was the beginning of the fulfillment of that prophecy and WW3 would establish it fully even though the U.S. won't start it.

That is the prophecy and those who would challenge it (there would be many) may temporarily win but in the final showdown, the prophecy would still prevail.

A lot of people will be "vaporized".

America has been protected by God from two World Wars but not this time because of the increasing liberalism and secularism among its people.

Salvation is personal and being a member of a religion would not save a person. But Eph. 2:8-10 and Jn 3:16 sums it all and those who live these verses in their hearts are the holders of true religion.

The history of this world is pretty much laid out already. Parts of America is liberal and secular and that will be destroyed by its enemies. But the bigger story is, America's enemies will be wiped off the surface of the earth.

America is not invincible and it could be defeated. But the irony of it is that it's a lot more stronger the second time around. Remember the words "I shall return"? In WW2, it did returned and pulverized it's enemy like powder.

The same will happen in WW3. The point is, it's not a good thing that America gets defeated coz the next episode will be the annihilation of its enemies. Believe it.

This sounds all warm and fuzzy, but I see two great leaders of America, Huckabee and Romney, engaged in a political battle which is really a religious/ doctrinal battle in disguise.
If the putative adults are taken off the court and youth are put in the game, they will move to subjectivity in religious belief and biblical interpretation;degradation of authority structures; and eventually doctrinal anarchy, followed by secularism.
Will any organized religion permit this?

Ibrahim,

Thank you for posting that. I personally like quoting the tafsir of ibn Kathir 9:29 to show the pact of Umar. It puts it in perspective because the pact is really part and parcel of the notion of jiziya and giving it by "hand" feeling subdued and willing submission.

http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=9&tid=20986
************************************
This is why the Leader of the faithful `Umar bin Al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, demanded his well-known conditions be met by the Christians, these conditions that ensured their continued humiliation, degradation and disgrace. The scholars of Hadith narrated from `Abdur-Rahman bin Ghanm Al-Ash`ari that he said, "I recorded for `Umar bin Al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, the terms of the treaty of peace he conducted with the Christians of Ash-Sham: `In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. This is a document to the servant of Allah `Umar, the Leader of the faithful, from the Christians of such and such city. When you (Muslims) came to us we requested safety for ourselves, children, property and followers of our religion. We made a condition on ourselves that we will neither erect in our areas a monastery, church, or a sanctuary for a monk, nor restore any place of worship that needs restoration nor use any of them for the purpose of enmity against Muslims. We will not prevent any Muslim from resting in our churches whether they come by day or night, and we will open the doors [of our houses of worship] for the wayfarer and passerby. Those Muslims who come as guests, will enjoy boarding and food for three days. We will not allow a spy against Muslims into our churches and homes or hide deceit [or betrayal] against Muslims. We will not teach our children the Qur'an, publicize practices of Shirk, invite anyone to Shirk or prevent any of our fellows from embracing Islam, if they choose to do so. We will respect Muslims, move from the places we sit in if they choose to sit in them. We will not imitate their clothing, caps, turbans, sandals, hairstyles, speech, nicknames and title names, or ride on saddles, hang swords on the shoulders, collect weapons of any kind or carry these weapons. We will not encrypt our stamps in Arabic, or sell liquor. We will have the front of our hair cut, wear our customary clothes wherever we are, wear belts around our waist, refrain from erecting crosses on the outside of our churches and demonstrating them and our books in public in Muslim fairways and markets. We will not sound the bells in our churches, except discretely, or raise our voices while reciting our holy books inside our churches in the presence of Muslims, nor raise our voices [with prayer] at our funerals, or light torches in funeral processions in the fairways of Muslims, or their markets. We will not bury our dead next to Muslim dead, or buy servants who were captured by Muslims. We will be guides for Muslims and refrain from breaching their privacy in their homes.' When I gave this document to `Umar, he added to it, `We will not beat any Muslim. These are the conditions that we set against ourselves and followers of our religion in return for safety and protection. If we break any of these promises that we set for your benefit against ourselves, then our Dhimmah (promise of protection) is broken and you are allowed to do with us what you are allowed of people of defiance and rebellion.'''
*******************************************

Kafir:
You mentioned Omar Pact a number of times in the course of your posts. I am listing the terms of this document again here for the benefit of those who are not yet familiar with it.
Omar Pact
This document is supposed to have been the peace accord offered by the Second Caliph, Omar, to the Christians of Syria,who, at the time , were the vast majority. This pact formed the pattern of later interaction between Muslims and natives of conquered lands and whose echoes reverberate till this date in predominantly Muslim countries. The Jizia or Head tax imposed on Christians and Jews and discrimination against them in employment and trade are not included in this document.
Omar Pact
"In the name of God, the Merciful and Compassionate. This is a letter to the servant of God Omar [ibn al-Khattab], Commander of the Faithful, from the Christians of such-and-such a city. When you came against us, we asked you for safe-conduct (aman) for ourselves, our descendants, our property, and the people of our community, and we undertook the following obligations toward you:
1. We shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood, new monasteries, Churches,
2. We shall keep our gates wide open for passersby and travelers. We shall give board and lodging to all Muslims who pass our way for three days.
3. We shall not give shelter in our churches or in our dwellings to any spy, nor bide him from the Muslims.
4. We shall not teach the Quran. We shall not manifest our religion publicly nor convert anyone to it. We shall not prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it.
6. We shall show respect toward the Muslims, and we shall rise from our seats when they wish to sit.
7.We shall not seek to resemble the Muslims by imitating any of their garments, the qalansuwa, the turban, footwear, or the parting of the hair. We shall not speak as they do, nor shall we adopt their kunyas.
8.We shall not mount on saddles, nor shall we gird swords nor bear any kind of arms nor carry them on our- persons.
9. We shall not engrave Arabic inscriptions on our seals.
10.We shall not sell fermented drinks.
11. We shall clip the fronts of our heads.
12. We shall always dress in the same way wherever we may be, and we shall bind the zunar round our waists
13. We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the Muslims.
14.We shall use only clappers in our churches very softly. We shall not raise our voices when following our dead. We shall not show lights on any of the roads of the Muslims or in their markets. We shall not bury our dead near the Muslims.
15.We shall not take slaves who have been allotted to Muslims.
16.We shall not build houses overtopping the houses of the Muslims.
(When I brought the letter to Omar, may God be pleased with him, he added, "We shall not strike a Muslim.")
r'an to our children.
We accept these conditions for ourselves and for the people of our community, and in return we receive safe-conduct.
If we in any way violate these undertakings for which we ourselves stand surety, we forfeit our covenant [dhimma], and we become liable to the penalties for contumacy and sedition.
Omar ibn al-Khittab replied: Sign what they ask, but add two clauses and impose them in addition to those which they have undertaken. They are: "They shall not buy anyone made prisoner by the Muslims," and "Whoever strikes a Muslim with deliberate intent shall forfeit the protection of this pact."
from Al-Turtushi, Siraj al-Muluk, pp. 229-230.
[This was a from handout at an Islamic History Class at the University of Edinburgh in 1979. Source of translation not given.]

Anti-A Kafir wrote: “A. Kafir has some nerve to lie about non-Muslims living in Spain as second class citizens.

A number of books exist on the subject. The truth is that many Jewish authors have called that era of Muslim Spain the "golden age for Jews".”
****************

The Spanish Jews were muslim collaborators and middlemen. They aided the muslims in their initial conquest of Spain in 711. And then they sent Jewish troops to aid the muslims in their fight against the Christians in 1431 at the Battle of Higueruela. In between they were muslim flunkies. Ferdinand and Isabella finally kicked them out of Spain after their conquest of Granada so that they could form a united Spanish nation free from foreign and subversive influences.

Craig,
The teens in Interfaith Action's Youth Leadership Program are Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Unitarian, Wiccan, and atheist (listed here in this order to indicate relative numbers of each group). Students span the spectrum in terms of religious involvement. There are teens who go to an Orthodox Jewish High School, Muslims that are very observant, others who don't have a strong denominational affiliation, some that identify as atheists and just about everything in between. What keeps them coming is that they plan and facilitate their own programs and major programs for the community. They have an opportunity to learn about others and discuss controversial topics in a respectful way, to share their point of view and listen to others without the need to convince others that "their beliefs are right and the other is wrong." This ability transfers to discussions in school and elsewhere in their lives.

I know of one program in Canada, the Centre for Diversity Education and Training in Toronto: www.cccj.ca.

Eboo Patel:

A young man is sentenced to death in Afghanistan because he has downloaded an essay that questions the role of women in Islam and is judged to have insulted Mohammed. "On Faith" questions if Islamic beliefs preclude freedom of speech and it is discussed here for several days.

You said nothing.

Two mentally disabled women in Iraq are strapped with bombs, sent out among busy shoppers, and the bombs are detonated by remote control killing the women and many other Muslim civilians. Several "On Faith" Panelist express there deep concern.

You say nothing.

Your silence angers and disturbs me. Why will you not address what is happening in Islamic nations? These are very important questions for Americans. Your silence may be taken as indifference. Why do you keep lecturing the readers here on the benefits of pluralism? Most (if not all) of us live in pluralistic countries. And as has been mentioned here before- why don't you teach pluralism to those living without its benefits? Exactly what are your intentions as an "On Faith" Panelist?

Mullah writes: "A. Kafir, Ibrahim Mahfouz, CCNL, and Arif have launched their crusades against Muslims. THEY WILL NOT SUCCEED. America knows that it has experienced such diatribes in the past.

Remember, "All Negroes are criminals", "All Italians are mafia", "All Japanese Americans are traitors (WW II)" etc. etc? All proven to be false.

These people must not be allowed to succeed. They will fail."

Why do you lie? When have I written anything against muslims? I am an ex-muslim. I have been a muslim. Muslims are like any other humans. What I do write is about Islam. I show what Islam is in which muslims are trapped. I examine Islam. I show that the Allah of the Quran is a savage. Muhammad, the prophet of islam, was a butcher and a savage. The Quran of Islam teaches hate for the non-muslims. Those are facts. Why do you equate examination of Islam with crusades against muslims? I pointed it out to Eboo, and I will point it out to you.
Look at the examples you give.
"Negros" cannot help being negros. They cannot change their DNA. Same with Italians, Japanese, etc. Now "negros" in africa have a very different culture and often a very different belief system than a "negro" in America. Do you understand that , or does that tax your few neurons?

Why is it wrong to examine, question, and point to the evil in a or any belief system? The ideology of Islam is not a very good belief system. The humans who are in it, that is the muslims, need to be asked why do they believe in such a hateful ideology. Why should they not be asked, why do they believe in system that teaches hate for anyone and everyone who does not believe in Muhammad?

The right to free speech is what is important and that is one of the strengths of America. Why should any american abridge my right to examine and question Islam.

Here is a challenge to you: I can show you verse after verse from the Quran where Allah commands the muslims not to befriend any non-muslims, and where he curses and threatens eternal torture. Why don't you show me some verses where Allah tells muslims to be friendly towards a non-muslim? Allah curses the pagans, curses the christians, curses the jews, and tells the muslims to keep them away from Kabbah, and to this day the followers of muhammad will not allow non-muslims in the entire cities of Mecca and Medinah because non-muslims are filthy. So show the Kafirs a few verses where Allah is telling the muslims to be friendly.

Anti A. Kafir,

Are you trying to provide comedic relief?
Anti A. Kafir writes:

"He does not know that passing the law does not automatically brings change."

What does that have anything to do with what you claimed initially:
"When was the right to vote for women granted in America? When were women allowed to work in factories or outside their homes in America?"

Do you what the word "granted" means? Do you know what the word "allowed" means. You used them. Look up their meaning, and try to stop making an utter fool of yourself. You are a fool, but why do insist on advertising it so loudly?

Then the Mullah writes:
"While the concept of equality gradually emerged in the previous century in America, he demands that this form of equality should have been practiced in Muslim Spain centuries ago. He has no shame."

There it is again. Mullah, you did not read what I wrote and started mouthing off about Menocal's book and I showed you that your book agreed that the non-muslims lived as dhimmis in spain. They are still treated very very badly in muslim lands. And women are still treated awfully in all muslim lands. Instead of addressing why your Savage Allah and your butcher of a prophet insist that the non-muslims pay jiziya with willing submission and feeling subdued, you try to point fingers at how women were treated in US. What does that have to do with anything? Let us accept that women were treated horribly in the west. Does that make the Pact of Umar any more acceptable? Does that make the laws under which non-muslims lived in spain, and have to still live in the Muslim world today any better? Instead of trying to see and doing something to make the lives of women and non-muslims any better in the muslims lands today, all you can come up with is point fingers idiotically and with your facts all wrong at others?

Can you possibly get any more pathetic, Mullah ji?

America is one of the greatest nation in the world. She is trying her best to eliminate discrimination based on race, religion, caste, national origin, and gender. Conscientious and dedicated people in America are fighting bigotry, racism, and other forms of prejudices.

Most states in America have established Civil Rights Commissions. There is a federal agency called Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). I used to follow the cases of discrimination registered with these agencies years ago. America has come a long way. There is a great deal of progress. But we still have work to do.

A. Kafir, Ibrahim Mahfouz, CCNL, and Arif have launched their crusades against Muslims. THEY WILL NOT SUCCEED. America knows that it has experienced such diatribes in the past.

Remember, "All Negroes are criminals", "All Italians are mafia", "All Japanese Americans are traitors (WW II)" etc. etc? All proven to be false.

These people must not be allowed to succeed. They will fail.

Homo A. kafirus writes:

On Aug. 26,1920, the 19th Amendment to the Constitution, granting women the right to vote, is signed into law by Secretary of State Bainbridge Colby.

In 1903 The National Women's Trade Union League (WTUL) is established to advocate for improved wages and working conditions for women."...
*********************************

Folks! This guy is full of contradictions. He does not know that passing the law does not automatically brings change. If passing the law alone could do the trick then there would be no crime anywhere in the world.

India passed Hindu Code Bill in the early 50s and outlawed dowry and caste discrimination. Both still exist.

The same way, it was only after WW II when young men were at the war front, women were asked to work in factories in America because there was a severe shortage of manpower. This, not the law brought change.

ANOTHER HYPOCRISY of Homo A. kafirus: While the concept of equality gradually emerged in the previous century in America, he demands that this form of equality should have been practiced in Muslim Spain centuries ago. He has no shame.

ANOTHER PROOF OF Homo A. kafirius' zero credibility.

God as all relighions claim to understand is nothing but figment of their imagination!

Mullah Victoria writes:

"When was the right to vote for women granted in America? When were women allowed to work in factories or outside their homes in America? For your information, the answer is: ONLY AFTER WW II.
You have zero credibilty, Homo A. kafirus."

On Aug. 26,1920, the 19th Amendment to the Constitution, granting women the right to vote, is signed into law by Secretary of State Bainbridge Colby.

In 1903 The National Women's Trade Union League (WTUL) is established to advocate for improved wages and working conditions for women.

My credibility might be zero but at least I have the sense not to post stupid facts that are totally and utterly wrong. Please do not come back and try telling the Kafirs that the second world war happened before 1903!!

I hope you are happy with the boost this gives your credibility.

Mullah Victoria,

Do you really think it is not obvious that you and Anti-A.Kafir are one and the same? As I said you are pathetic. And now you show that you hate homosexuals. Please spare the excuse your buddy on the other thread was trying out with homo-sapien, homo-erectus, etc. Why has islam clouded your brain with so much hate? Hate the kafirs, hate the pagans, hate the jews, hate the homosexuals? So much for eboo's pluralism.

So Uri's word means more than your Allahs?

The only mention of Jiziya, the special tax on non-muslims, is mention in 9:29

009.029
YUSUFALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Why should the non-muslims pay the Jizya with "willing submission, and feel themselves subdued"?

LoL! You are telling me that I should take the word of a jew to understand Islam? I know what jiziya is, I know what "willing submission" means and I know what "feel themselves subdued" means. I know how the christians in the middle east live, how the hindus in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Malaysia, etc. live.

Do you really have the minutest residue of your dead conscience left in you?

Homo A. kafirus:

You are not only a liar but also a shameless person.
Your lack of civility calling Victoria, "Mullah Victoria" is pathetic. Poor Victoria!

Did you read Uri Avnerni's explanation for protecting Jews for paying taxes by the Muslims of Spain? And, of course, you are determined to apply today's concepts of freedom and equality for a society of centuries ago. Of course, you are impossible to reason with.

When was the right to vote for women granted in America? When were women allowed to work in factories or outside their homes in America? For your information, the answer is: ONLY AFTER WW II.

You have zero credibilty, Homo A. kafirus.

Mullah Victoria,

Go live in a muslim country for a while with your hijab and Abayha and see if learn as much as your american sister from libiya did:

American Woman Boasted of Saudi Freedoms To Bush Brother Before Arrest at Starbuckshttp://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,329605,00.html

"I was boasting about Riyadh, telling him it doesn't deserve its bad reputation," she said. "I told him I never experienced any harassment. I'd had no trouble as a woman. It was business as usual."

But on Monday, Yara learned that she had been wrong. She was thrown in jail, strip-searched, threatened and forced to sign false confessions by the kingdom's "Mutaween" police.
.....
Yara's crime: sitting with a male business partner in the "family-only" section of the Starbucks -- the only area of the café where women and men can sit together. In Saudi Arabia, public contact between unrelated men and women is strictly prohibited.

Yara, who was born in Tripoli, Libya, to Jordanian parents, grew up in Salt Lake City. She moved to Saudi Arabia eight years ago with her husband, a prominent businessman.
...
She is taking medication to treat post-traumatic stress while she recovers from her ordeal at her family's home in Jeddah.

"Thank God they did not harm her more," said her husband, Hatim.

"The psychological impact is beyond description," Hatim said. "She's normally a very calm, stable woman. Now she's afraid to leave our compound."

**************************

Mullah Victoria,

You are truly pathetic. You don't even have the spine to not use a multi-nick (Anti-A. Kafir)! Try to acquire a minimum of self respect. Try it, it is not that bad.

You seem to cannot comprehend simple facts, and distort what I said. I wrote: "Muslim spain pluralism was built on the laws that codified most of the Pact of Umar, and the christians and jews lived as dhimmis."

Now the Maria Rosa Menocal that you bring forth with great fanfare writes in her book:

"The dhimmi, as these covenanted peoples were called, were granted religious freedom, not forced to convert to Islam. They could continue to be Jews and Christians, and, as it turned out, they could share in much of Muslim social and economic life. In return for this freedom of religious conscience the Peoples of the Book (pagans had no such privilege) were required to pay a special tax — no Muslims paid taxes — and to observe a number of restrictive regulations: Christians and Jews were prohibited from attempting to proselytize Muslims, from building new places of worship, from displaying crosses or ringing bells. In sum, they were forbidden most public displays of their religious rituals."

What she does not say but jewish sources document is that the other humiliating rules of the Pact of Umar were also part of the law. The jews could not retaliate when slapped, had to wear identifying marks on their shops, etc. etc.

The christian visigoths were killing the jews. The spanish christians did not tolerate any religion other than their own, and eventually that led to blood letting among the christians themselves. Muslims had the system of Dhimma perfected to a T. The jews did not live as equals, but they were not being killed as they were by the spanish christians or being made to live as slaves. Islam does not tolerate equality for the non-muslims. Dhimma is living under the Pact of Umar. Living as dhimmi is not as good as living as equals and free. The kafirs offer the muslims equality and freedom in the kafir lands. The muslim around the world offer dhimmitude and humiliation in the muslim lands.

Why don't you and eboo tell the muslims in muslim countries what equality and freedom means, and that Allah and Muhammad were true savages for cursing and wanting nothing but humiliation for the non-muslims? And stop trying to lie that the non-muslims in spain were being treated fairly or even justly. Their treatment was much worse than what the Copts of Eygpt get in the present, and I would not want my enemy to live under the humiliation that the Coptic christians have to bear in that muslim land.

Eboo:

I used to strongly advocate pluralism when I looked to politics and policy for salvation.

Now I wonder what "pluralism" as you use it means. I too am concerned by people who reflexively use violence to solve problems--but I don't sensationalize it. I am equally concerned with those who use hatred to justify violence for religious purposes: Christian, Muslim, Sikh or Hindu.

It's good for all people, young and old, to have enlightened discussions about culture, history and the role that faith has played in them. I don't find that boring. Visiting a Jewish friend's house for seder dinner was an important experience for me in grade school. I don't find it necessary to celebrate it every year though.

If by "pluralism" you mean to dilute the quality and intensity of the faith of these young people with the goal of diminishing the importance of belief in and obedience to God in their lives then you are on the wrong track.

The problem with the world is not that there is too much religion, or even too much conservatism in faith. I believe that the problem is that people who claim to have faith don't really "walk the walk" and adhere to the fundamental principles underlying them. They let materialism and human frailty get in the way. God wants more faith in the world not less.

Christians aren't dedicated to love as they should be; Muslims don't live in peace as they should, etc.

Young people should be encouraged to be authentic and serious about their faith. A lot of training programs and funding are not necessary. To me that money could be better spent on the poor.

Adult leadership, of all faiths, is not inspiring young people to love, forgive, reconcile and serve others. That's the problem. You lead by example.

But, if by "pluralism" you expect Christians to accept satanism and witchcraft as co-equal religions; it will never happen because it's against scripture. Other faiths will also have a problem with rewriting basic tenets to deal with modern political correctness.

We saw this interplay this week when the pope announced that the traditional easter prayer for Jews had been rewritten (http://my.earthlink.net/article/int?guid=20080205/47a7ed50_3ca6_1552620080205723763131.
The Jewish response was that they didn't think that the changes went far enough. Their temerity was remarkable really, given that what Catholics do is none of their business. I would be happy just that someone was praying for me.

Let me be clear, I do not consider myself to be a "Christian conservative." Some of my beliefs are more liberal than evangelical orthodoxy would dictate and some are more conservative. I go by the bible and the example of Jesus Christ. I also believe that for all who are sincere about seeking God that there are many paths to salvation.

I believe that all people will be resurrected into an afterlife; and that there are different levels there. The holiest and most righteous being closer to God. The evil will suffer a spiritual "death" because of their distance from the light of the Lord. And, I believe there are many shades in between good and evil. I believe that those who want to can move closer to the Lord by changing, even after death; somewhat like the Catholic concepts of purgatory or limbo.

The initial standard we will be judged by will be faith in God, followed by an evaluation of your good works or deeds that naturally flow from your faith and love.

Nevertheless, I ask all to consider: what will you do and how will you respond if it turns out that Jesus Christ really is Lord when you are judged in heaven?

This person says...
"YOU CAN NOT (and have no capacity) to discuss with highly educated and articulate American Muslims, Arif."

The people you've named above lie, we all know that.

What about the lowly un-educated not so articulate American Muslims? You think I'd stand a chance with them? Would I have the capacity? An uneducated Somali cab driver perhaps?
Is that scarf around your neck too tight? maybe you should loosen it a little? Or better toss it.

Holy Bible:
I mean no disrespect to you. But my question to you is: Have you read any books other than the Bible? Did you go to college and take courses in history, political science, sociology, anthropology and the natural sciences?

Someone raised the question about Diana Eck and her sexual orientation for being a Lesbian. What does the Holy Bible say about homosexuality?

I have read a lot about this on blogs. Do you think that the bunch of anti-religion (specially anti-Muslim commentators)people have this on their agenda?) and my conclusion is that the Holy Bible does not approve of homosexuality. It even condemns it.

very thought provoking article ...
thank you...
i suspect you may have touched upon one of the spirtual and cosmic and truths of karma or whater any term differnt people from diffenernt walks of life use to describle the same thing they all see and know is truth in its essance and simplest form and can be built on with abadon becase problems encountered will undoutedly be from another direction or miscomception. i see the main point is that all people.. of all ages .. of all religions...want to follow thier own heart with thier own time and energy..that people of all social and economic classes of many different skin colors and even laugauges of speechh.... do not want to be given help ... or gifts to things they themselve do not really care about and have no use for in the present especially when they have some truely profound wants and needs which are being ignored.. we all get plenty of offers for icecubes in the winter... this causes i suspect normally well meaning people to discard and step on and blow up things which they did not ask even if they might could undeniably use in some form at the present. the fact that norma;lly speaking self seeking people have come offering trinkets which require slave labor or outright slavery in aquiecense to the undeniable monoply and strong armed tactics used by bothe the rules of state and the terrorist and the agitators who use violence fear and hate to propagate thier poison and ensure thier continued tyranny and oppression over the rest of the world. i'm not talking about an honest fair profit by a well run business that is a truely beutiiful and wonderous thing for everone involved in the process and actually inriches all not just the sell because if the sell becomes to greedy he finds himself like the sharks in thier feed frenzies .. mortally wounded and actually eat parts of thier own body thinking they are feeding themseselves.. this greatly speed up the actual truth in life thier demise because of dishonest unwise conceptions of reality.. i call these people social preditors and think they are mentally ill... they rside at high level in at least small number in all the great religions of the world as weel as in major busdinesses and those who would appoint themselve rulers and deciders. whether that be the tiny bully in ones own neighborhood or the people who if not condone actually hide misconduct against innoccent in thier own ranks while casting thier jaudice eyes upon the very real but often lesser faultw and weaknesses of others... it important i think to remembe pure evil and pure goodness rarely exists in on one person in real life we are all imperfect people in an imperfect world looking for absolute truth we can hang our hats and our hearts on.. so i suspect the terrorist will have no more luck if confronted with love and understanding and non violence and the actual rule of law not becoming a better terrorist to combat the terrorist. God please help us all from ourselves and let us ask the other person what direction is it my freind that you are trying to go and help or not help as the situation be but certainly not try to stand in the way of another or we may find ourselves getting repeated run over on the highway of life not because we have bad intentions but because we have chosen to speak in the middle of the road when we neede to be walking in one direction or the other.. but i'm just a dyslexic artist sorry about the spelling but i think people can figure out what i mean please check 4 truth if any is contained.. remember play hard but try to be nice... nice does not mean doormat

Eboo says:

"Diana Eck has been following this phenomenon for two decades from her perch at Harvard"

I understand her perch is well-padded:

"A prominent Saudi businessman said yesterday that he is donating $20 million each to Georgetown and Harvard universities for the study of Islam and the Muslim world as part of his philanthropic efforts to promote interfaith understanding."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/12/AR2005121200591.html

She's a bought American shill for Islam and is working hard for the money:

Articles and Talks by Diana L. Eck

http://www.pluralism.org/about/eck/articles_and_talks.php

I think the real message here would be to MOVE FORWARD, inclusively, to ensure the horrors of the past are not repeated.

All of you can go on all day about who did what to whom - many religious groups over the centuries have twisted their religious tenets to suit their own needs, economic or otherwise. Not one group is completely innocent.

All of you can go on comparing 2 vastly different societies to see which was more "barbaric".

All of you can go on moaning about what OTHERS are doing or aren't doing to make the world a worse place, instead of reflecting on how you YOURSELF can make the world a better place.

However, it is great to know that some people haven't been caught up in this dialogue. Instead, they are actively DOING something. While it's imperative to know the past, it's disasterous to live in it.

Craig

"Diana Eck has been following this phenomenon for two decades from her perch at Harvard. In her 2006 Presidential Address to the American Academy of Religion, she calls the burgeoning interfaith movement in America the new convivencia – a term generally applied to Muslim Spain in the Middle Ages, a time when Christians, Muslims and Jews worked together to build a society based on pluralism."

There is a law in Mexico recognizing gay unions- Ley de Sociedad de Convivencia. Are you certain you have correctly quoted Diana Eck? She is a lesbian. What would happen to her (and her partner Dorothy Austin) under Shari'ah Law?

Antikafir,

The Scriptures says the following to all non-believers in Jesus the Son of God:

"Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God" (John 3:18).

Antikafir,

The Scriptures says the following to all non-believers in Jesus the Son of God:

"Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God" (John 3:18).

Antikafir,

The Scriptures says the following to all non-believers in Jesus the Son of God:

"Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God" (John 3:18).

Arif is intellectually and morally bankrupt and so is CCNL.
They can not show any knowledge of history. They are simply parroting anti-Muslim rhetoric.

YOU CAN NOT (and have no capacity) to discuss with highly educated and articulate American Muslims, Arif.

This person says;
"So, a good Christian, a good Muslim, or a good Jew "

IT should be corrected to... a good Christian, a BAD Muslim or a good Jew.

Why?
Bad Muslims needed in the West; one who does not pray, does not mind what he eats, does not want foot washers in public places, uses public toilets like they should be used, does not demand Sharia law, does not want special food served in public schools, does not want his six year old wearing a towel on her head in public, eats meat that is humanely prepared and butchered, agrees that Muslims are NOT superior to other humans, likes Kafirs, she will shake hands with men, may have a drink or two, won't stuff foot in sink for wash (it is really gross), does not mind woman jogging in tight shorts, goes to beaches wearing shorts men/women, won't fly plane in building, won't explode in train/bus.

America, give us your poor, tired ...bad Muslim!

That is what pluralism is all about Eboo.

Here is what an Israeli peace activist named Uri Avneri has to say about tolerance practiced by Muslims. Folks do not believe what A. Kafir has to say. His credibility has been destroyed:

Mohammad's Sword

Uri Avneryby Uri Avnery
September 27, 2006


Since the days when Roman Emperors threw Christians to the lions, the relations between the emperors and the heads of the church have undergone many changes.

Constantine the Great, who became Emperor in the year 306--exactly 1700 years ago--encouraged the practice of Christianity in the empire, which included Palestine . Centuries later, the church split into an Eastern (Orthodox) and a Western (Catholic) part. In the West, the Bishop of Rome, who acquired the title of Pope, demanded that the Emperor accept his superiority.

The struggle between the Emperors and the Popes played a central role in European history and divided the peoples. It knew ups and downs. Some Emperors dismissed or expelled a Pope, some Popes dismissed or excommunicated an Emperor. One of the Emperors, Henry IV, "walked to Canossa ," standing for three days barefoot in the snow in front of the Pope's castle, until the Pope deigned to annul his excommunication.

But there were times when Emperors and Popes lived in peace with each other. We are witnessing such a period today. Between the present Pope, Benedict XVI, and the present Emperor, George Bush II, there exists a wonderful harmony. Last week's speech by the Pope, which aroused a world-wide storm, went well with Bush's crusade against "Islamofascism," in the context of the "Clash of Civilizations."

IN HIS lecture at a German university, the 265th Pope described what he sees as a huge difference between Christianity and Islam: while Christianity is based on reason, Islam denies it. While Christians see the logic of God's actions, Muslims deny that there is any such logic in the actions of Allah.

As a Jewish atheist, I do not intend to enter the fray of this debate. It is much beyond my humble abilities to understand the logic of the Pope. But I cannot overlook one passage, which concerns me too, as an Israeli living near the fault-line of this "war of civilizations."

In order to prove the lack of reason in Islam, the Pope asserts that the prophet Muhammad ordered his followers to spread their religion by the sword. According to the Pope, that is unreasonable, because faith is born of the soul, not of the body. How can the sword influence the soul?
To support his case, the Pope quoted--of all people--a Byzantine Emperor, who belonged, of course, to the competing Eastern Church. At the end of the 14th Century, the Emperor Manuel II Palaeologus told of a debate he had--or so he said (its occurrence is in doubt)--with an unnamed Persian Muslim scholar. In the heat of the argument, the Emperor (according to himself) flung the following words at his adversary:
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."

These words give rise to three questions: (a) Why did the Emperor say them? (b) Are they true? (c) Why did the present Pope quote them?
WHEN MANUEL II wrote his treatise, he was the head of a dying empire. He assumed power in 1391, when only a few provinces of the once illustrious empire remained. These, too, were already under Turkish threat.

At that point in time, the Ottoman Turks had reached the banks of the Danube . They had conquered Bulgaria and the north of Greece , and had twice defeated relieving armies sent by Europe to save the Eastern Empire . On May 29, 1453 , only a few years after Manuel's death, his capital, Constantinople (the present Istanbul ) fell to the Turks, putting an end to the Empire that had lasted for more than a thousand years.
During his reign, Manuel made the rounds of the capitals of Europe in an attempt to drum up support. He promised to reunite the church. There is no doubt that he wrote his religious treatise in order to incite the Christian countries against the Turks and convince them to start a new crusade. The aim was practical, theology was serving politics.

In this sense, the quote serves exactly the requirements of the present Emperor, George Bush II. He, too, wants to unite the Christian world against the mainly Muslim "Axis of Evil." Moreover, the Turks are again knocking on the doors of Europe , this time peacefully. It is well known that the Pope supports the forces that object to the entry of Turkey into the European Union.

IS THERE any truth in Manuel's argument?
The pope himself threw in a word of caution. As a serious and renowned theologian, he could not afford to falsify written texts. Therefore, he admitted that the Qur'an specifically forbade the spreading of the faith by force. He quoted the second Sura, verse 256 (strangely fallible, for a pope, he meant verse 257) which says: "There must be no coercion in matters of faith."

How can one ignore such an unequivocal statement? The Pope simply argues that this commandment was laid down by the prophet when he was at the beginning of his career, still weak and powerless, but that later on he ordered the use of the sword in the service of the faith. Such an order does not exist in the Qur'an. True, Muhammad called for the use of the sword in his war against opposing tribes--Christian, Jewish and others--in Arabia , when he was building his state. But that was a political act, not a religious one; basically a fight for territory, not for the spreading of the faith.

Jesus said: "You will recognize them by their fruits." The treatment of other religions by Islam must be judged by a simple test: How did the Muslim rulers behave for more than a thousand years, when they had the power to "spread the faith by the sword"?

Well, they just did not.
For many centuries, the Muslims ruled Greece . Did the Greeks become Muslims? Did anyone even try to Islamize them? On the contrary, Christian Greeks held the highest positions in the Ottoman administration. The Bulgarians, Serbs, Romanians, Hungarians and other European nations lived at one time or another under Ottoman rule and clung to their Christian faith. Nobody compelled them to become Muslims and all of them remained devoutly Christian.

True, the Albanians did convert to Islam, and so did the Bosniaks. But nobody argues that they did this under duress. They adopted Islam in order to become favorites of the government and enjoy the fruits.

In 1099, the Crusaders conquered Jerusalem and massacred its Muslim and Jewish inhabitants indiscriminately, in the name of the gentle Jesus. At that time, 400 years into the occupation of Palestine by the Muslims, Christians were still the majority in the country. Throughout this long period, no effort was made to impose Islam on them. Only after the expulsion of the Crusaders from the country, did the majority of the inhabitants start to adopt the Arabic language and the Muslim faith--and they were the forefathers of most of today's Palestinians.

THERE IS no evidence whatsoever of any attempt to impose Islam on the Jews. As is well known, under Muslim rule the Jews of Spain enjoyed a bloom the like of which the Jews did not enjoy anywhere else until almost our time. Poets like Yehuda Halevy wrote in Arabic, as did the great Maimonides. In Muslim Spain, Jews were ministers, poets, scientists. In Muslim Toledo, Christian, Jewish and Muslim scholars worked together and translated the ancient Greek philosophical and scientific texts. That was, indeed, the Golden Age. How would this have been possible, had the Prophet decreed the "spreading of the faith by the sword"?

What happened afterwards is even more telling. When the Catholics re-conquered Spain from the Muslims, they instituted a reign of religious terror. The Jews and the Muslims were presented with a cruel choice: to become Christians, to be massacred or to leave. And where did the hundreds of thousand of Jews, who refused to abandon their faith, escape? Almost all of them were received with open arms in the Muslim countries. The Sephardi ("Spanish") Jews settled all over the Muslim world, from Morocco in the west to Iraq in the east, from Bulgaria (then part of the Ottoman Empire ) in the north to Sudan in the south. Nowhere were they persecuted. They knew nothing like the tortures of the Inquisition, the flames of the auto-da-fe, the pogroms, the terrible mass-expulsions that took place in almost all Christian countries, up to the Holocaust.
WHY? Because Islam expressly prohibited any persecution of the "peoples of the book." In Islamic society, a special place was reserved for Jews and Christians. They did not enjoy completely equal rights, but almost. They had to pay a special poll-tax, but were exempted from military service--a trade-off that was quite welcome to many Jews. It has been said that Muslim rulers frowned upon any attempt to convert Jews to Islam even by gentle persuasion--because it entailed the loss of taxes.

Every honest Jew who knows the history of his people cannot but feel a deep sense of gratitude to Islam, which has protected the Jews for 50 generations, while the Christian world persecuted the Jews and tried many times "by the sword" to get them to abandon their faith.

THE STORY about "spreading the faith by the sword" is an evil legend, one of the myths that grew up in Europe during the great wars against the Muslims--the reconquista of Spain by the Christians, the Crusades and the repulsion of the Turks, who almost conquered Vienna . I suspect that the German Pope, too, honestly believes in these fables. That means that the leader of the Catholic world, who is a Christian theologian in his own right, did not make the effort to study the history of other religions.

Why did he utter these words in public? And why now?
There is no escape from viewing them against the background of the new Crusade of Bush and his evangelist supporters, with his slogans of "Islamofascism" and the "Global War on Terrorism"--when "terrorism" has become a synonym for Muslims. For Bush's handlers, this is a cynical attempt to justify the domination of the world's oil resources. Not for the first time in history, a religious robe is spread to cover the nakedness of economic interests; not for the first time, a robbers' expedition becomes a Crusade.
The speech of the Pope blends into this effort. Who can foretell the dire consequences?
Uri Avnery is a peace activist.
URL: http://www.strike-the-root.com/62/avnery/avnery9.html

A. Kafir has some nerve to lie about non-Muslims living in Spain as second class citizens.

A number of books exist on the subject. The truth is that many Jewish authors have called that era of Muslim Spain the "golden age for Jews".

One recent book, "The Ornament of the World: How Muslims, Jews, and Christians
Created a Culture of Tolerance in Medieval Spain" (2002: Little Brown Co.)
Yale professor, Maria Rosa Menocal, provides a good reading on the
subject.

The book is a story of an extraordinary place and time. Both history and
literature often depict the Middle Ages as a dark and barbaric period
characterized by intellectual backwardness and religious persecution.
Menocal brings us an altogether different picture of this part of medieval
Europe, where tolerance was often the rule and literature, science, and art
flourished in a climate of cultural openness.

So, a good Christian, a good Muslim, or a good Jew is someone who wants to
live in peace in the 21st century, believing in interfaith understanding
and is less interested in fighting for a narrow identity by advocating
human equality, peace and justice.

Folks! This A. Kafir with zero credibility is going to come back and denounce Maria Rosa Menocal, I suspect. That will confirm to you his AGENDA.

The marriage of faith and politics in American has become an un-holy alliance. Someone made a deal with the devil - history will tell us who pulled the short straw.
Ohg
http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/02/07/evangelicals-republicans-two-tar-babies/

Mr. Patel (or anyone else, for that matter) - I am curious as to the make-up of these interfaith youth groups. Are all participants religious, or are there secular participants as well? What religions are represented?

Also, are there any in Canada? Interfaith groups are a fantastic idea, I think. Even better that the youth involved are actually legitimatly leading these groups!

Thanks,
Craig

Sharia is coming...one small step at a time.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Archbishop backs sharia law for British Muslims

David Batty and Fred Attewill
Thursday February 7, 2008
Guardian UK

The Archbishop of Canterbury sparked controversy today when he said the introduction of sharia law for British Muslims was "unavoidable".
Rowan Williams told BBC Radio 4's World at One that Muslims should be able to choose whether to have matters such as marital disputes dealt with under sharia law or the British legal system.

His comments were strongly criticised by the National Secular Society but welcomed by the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), which stressed it did not back the introduction of sharia criminal law.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Willams said giving sharia official status in the UK would help maintain social cohesion because some Muslims do not relate to the British legal system.
Its introduction would mean Muslims would no longer have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty".

Williams said his proposal would only work if sharia law was properly understood, rather than seen through the eyes of biased media reports.

The archbishop said he was not proposing the adoption of extreme interpretations of sharia law practiced in some repressive regimes.

He said: "It seems unavoidable and, as a matter of fact, certain conditions of sharia are already recognised in our society and under our law, so it is not as if we are bringing in an alien and rival system.

"We already have in this country a number of situations in which the internal law of religious communities is recognised by the law of the land as justifying conscientious objections in certain circumstances. There is a place for finding what would be a constructive accommodation with some aspects of Muslim law as we already do with aspects of other kinds of religious law."

Williams went on: "It would be quite wrong to say that we could ever license a system of law for some community which gave people no right of appeal, no way of exercising the rights that are guaranteed to them as citizens in general.

"But there are ways of looking at marital disputes, for example, which provide an alternative to the divorce courts as we understand them. In some cultural and religious settings they would seem more appropriate."

A spokesman for the MCB said many UK Muslims already used sharia law in aspects of their day-to-day lives, such as banking and marriage, and the same principle of separate laws could "easily be accepted for other faiths groups".

He said introducing sharia law for marriages would combat the problem of forced marriage because Islam required the consent of both parties.

The National Secular Society said it was another example of Britain "sleepwalking to segregation".

"Our view is simple. You can't have a country where you have separate laws for separate faith groups," it said. "The same religious groups who are calling for integration are the same one who want segregation

Eboo writes: "she calls the burgeoning interfaith movement in America the new convivencia – a term generally applied to Muslim Spain in the Middle Ages, a time when Christians, Muslims and Jews worked together to build a society based on pluralism."

Maybe you should try being honest, once for a change, and tell about how plural Muslim spain really was. Muslim spain pluralism was built on the laws that codified most of the Pact of Umar, and the christians and jews lived as dhimmis. The muslims enjoy equality in the Kafir lands. Does it ever bother your conscience that not one muslim country offers the kafirs equality? Have you ever objected or written to any muslim leader on that? Instead you sing lies about the butcher Muhammad and his quran.

"Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God" (John 3:18).